Cantors Assembly Journal of Synagogue Music

>

of
Synagogue

I

Music

July 1989 . Tamuz 5749 . Vol. XIX . No. 1

From the Editor

Jack Chomsky 3

Articles:

The Origins and Identification of the
Nusah L'hol of Frankfurt Am Main

Brian Mayer 6

A Guide to Music Resources In Israel

Yosef Zucker 56

The Nigun of Jewish History

Yosef Burg 64

The Case of the Lost Amen:
Victim of an Erroneous Custom

Hayyim Kieval 72

The Spirit of Jewish Prayer Abrahe

\m Joshua Heschel 77

Review of New Music

David Finko's "Hear, Israel"

Boris Kazansky 104

Music Section

Tsur Hayeinu

Paul Kowarsky, 1 1 4
arr. Charles Heller

music, volume xix, Number I
July 1989 / Tamuz 5749

editor: Jack Chomsky

managing editor: Samuel Rosenbaum

editorial board .- Stephen Freedman Paul Kowarsky, Sheldon Levitt,
Saul Meisels, Robert Scherr, David Silverstein, Robert Solomon, David
Tilman, Abraham Salkov.

officers of the cantors assembly Robert Kieval, President;
Nathan Lam, Vice President; Stephen J. Stein, Treasurer Abraham
Lubin, Secretary; Samuel Rosenbaum, Executive Vice President.

journal of synagogue music is a semi-annual publication. The sub-
scription fee is $15.00 per year. AN articles, communications and sub-
scriptions should be addressed to Journal of Synagogue Music, Cantors
Assembly, 150 Fifth Avenue, New York 10011.

Copyright © 1989, Cantors Assembly

FROM THE EDITOR

The first piece in this issue of the Journal of Synagogue Music is
Brian Mayer's "masterful" thesis "The Origins and Identification of
the Nusah L'Hol of Frankfurt Am Main? This paper was presented
as Brian's Masters thesis at The Cantors Institute of the lewish Theo-
logical Seminary. It is a beautifully organized and written work which
I know our readers will want to study closely.

Yosef (Jeffrey) Zucker has done us the great service of compiling
a "Guide to Jewish Music Resources in Israel? This should prove to
be of great value to anyone seeking materials from Israel or planning
a relatively short trip to Israel.

Since the easy availability of convention cassette recordings has made
the publication of convention proceedings in their entirety a luxury,
we plan to publish from time to time such worthy papers whose con-
tents — in addition to the worthiness of the subjects — especially merit
the printed form.

In this issue there are two such items:

Dr. Yosef Burg's delightful and scholarly paper on "The Nigun of
Jewish History" delivered during the course of our 40th annual con-
vention in Jerusalem.

Rabbi Hayyim Kieval's provocative d'var Torah. "To intone or not
to intone:' in which he deals with the question regarding the hatimah
immediately before the Amidah in Shaharit. Responses (positive or
negative) to this piece would be most welcome.

Also, at the recent convention, I had the honor of chairing a ses-
sion in which Samuel Rosenbaum presented a major paper entitled
"Toward A New Vision of Hazzanut!' For my introduction, I took the
liberty of reading at some length from a speech delivered by Abraham
Joshua Heschel at the 1953 Convention of the Rabbinical Assembly.
Heschel's remarks on "The Spirit of Jewish Prayer" are incredibly con-
temporary. We are reprinting his paper in this issue of the Journal.
I know you will find it stimulating and insightful. Thanks to Robert
Kieval for sharing the place with me originally.

Review of New Music:

Also included in this issue is an appreciation and analysis of David
Finko's "Hear, Israel:' a service for Friday evening composed for
two cantors (bass and soprano), choir and orchestra. Some might ques-
tion the inclusion of such a work in our Journal. It is clearly conceived

in the milieu of the concert hall more than the synagogue, and the
fact that the service is set entirely in English also might put off some
of our readers. Yet, I was impressed with the earnestness of the com-
poser's approach to the liturgy and decided that it was important to
share this piece with our readers. Bloch's Avodath Hakodesh, after all,
is perceived by many to be the high point of composition for the modern
Synagogue. We must certainly pay attention to new efforts in the area
of Jewish sacred music repertoire. We must focus on the ability of a
composer and composition to convey the meaning and spirit of the
text in a universal sense.

And, as to services in English, there is certainly no prohibition. It
is the first language of American Jewry and our tradition encourages
prayer in the vernacular. I have even taken on occasion to rendering
portions of the daily service in English, chanted in the traditionalHHsa/j.
This is an interesting exercise, and after a few attempts becomes a pleas-
ant way to daven. Additionally, it provides a good way to demonstrate
how to chant the service out loud in a way in which all of the congre-
gants can participate. I would welcome some writing on this subject
or a lively discussion of it!

In the M usic Section:

Thanks to Paul Kowarsky for sending us his original setting of Tsur
Hayeinu with piano arrangement by Charles Heller.

Corrections

In the last issue we published a transcription of Anenu credited to
Jacob Rapoport. According to Robert Kieval, this piece was actually
written by Hazzan Max Kotlowitz and published in 1962 by Bloch Pub-
lishing with a piano arrangement by Samuel Bugatch. Other readers
who wrote to inform us of this error included Stuart Friedman of South-
field, Michigan and Joseph Gross of Hallandale, Florida.

Also in the last issue, David Bagley's piece regarding his trip to Ruma-
nia and the Soviet Union failed to list the other participants. The arti-
cle should have indicated that the participants were Bagley, Ben Zion
Miller, Yaakov Motzen, Moshe Schulhof, and Daniel Gildar. Bagley's
piece was actually a personal retrospective and did not mention any
of the other participants.

Moshe Schulhof. wrote to say, "We all played equal roles in terms
of artistic achievement and the emotional ties that we all felt and con-
veyed to our fellow Jews behind the Iron Curtain . . . We gave four-
teen concerts in a period of fourteen days, many times without adequate

sleep or food. We sang under extremely adverse conditions in cold,
dusty halls, and at times even hunger. Sitting on trains all night one
time without heat in below zero temperature. We all did this lishmah,
to ignite the spark of the ' Pinteleh Yid' that remains in these coun-
tries. What we accomplished in terms of reawakening Jewish aware-
ness and pride was worth the sacrifices we made and much more!'
Joseph Gross also lamented the fact that Hazzan Bagley failed to creidt
him (Gross) as the composer of the piece which Bagley described as
"the most sought after recitative... which somehow kindled the spark
of emunah in their hearts:'

We hope you will enjoy this issue. We look forward to hearing your
responses to the pieces within its pages. Please send us more material
for these pages — text or music.

One more thing! Does your Synagogue library subscribe to the Jour-
nal? It should. If it doesn't, please arrange it. You might even con-
sider a gift subscription which the library could pick up the following
year.

— Jack Chomsky

THE ORIGINS AND IDENTIFICATION OF THE
NUSAH L'HOL OF FRANKFURT AM MAIN

Brian J . Mayer

It has been the quest of many musicologists to prove that Jewish
synagogue music has its roots in antiquity. It has often been stated
that the cantillation of the Bible is the oldest form of Jewish music
and is the antecedent to synagogal chant. The music ofaamey hamikra
has been shown to date back to the Second Temple period ! If a con-
nection can be established between nusah and cantillation, the claim
could be made that the traditional prayer modes indeed have a foun-
dation in Levitical music. In examining the nusah V hoi of the commu-
nity of Frankfurt am Main, substantial evidence appears which provides
credence to the hypothesis that European weekday prayer chant is direct-
ly related to the music of cantillation.

It should not come as a surprise that Frankfurt am Main is the fo-
cus of such a study. The Jewish communal presence in Frankfurt dates
back clearly at least to the year 1074, when Emperor Heinrich IV grant-
ed special financial considerations to citizens and Jews in Worms and
Frankfurt. 2 Other indications suggest that Jews were residing in the
city as early as the ninth century.3 Although this German Jewish com-
munity was not the first of its kind in the Rhineland region, its im-
portance grew significantly through the medieval period and blossomed
to its greatest glory in the modern era. The historian Cecil Roth
described Frankfurt am Main as "the mother city of modern German
Jewry." He explained:

This was the only German Jewish community of major impor-
tance which was permitted to continue in existence from the me-
dieval period onwards; it was for many generations the greatest
of the German Jewish centres; and it was hence that most of the
best-known German Jewish families emerged, to make their mark
in the world of finance, of scholarship, of science and of politics
in so many lands. 4

BRIAN J. MAYER is Cantor at Temple Emanu-El of Providence, Rhode Island. This
paper was presented as a thesis for the Master of Sacred Music Degree awarded by
the Cantors Institute of the Jewish Theological Seminary in 1988.

7

Over the centuries Frankfurt am Main produced a host of leading rab-
binic figures. Among the most prominent were Eliezer Treves (ca.1530),
Isaiah Horowitz (1565-1630), Joseph Juspa Hahn, the author of Yosef
Ometz (d. 1637) and Abraham Brody (d. 1717), who was "considered
the greatest talmudic authority of his time."5 Joseph Kashman (d, 1758),
the grandson of Joseph J. Hahn, published his Noheg K'tzon Yosef
in 1718."

The single most outstanding traditional scholar who heralded from
Frankfurt am Main was Moses Sofer-Schreiber (1762-1840), better
known as the hatam sofer. Despite the fact that his lofty career took
him to a position is Pressburg, he always identified himself with his
cherished place of birth. His collected Responsa are signed "Moses
Sofer of Frankfurt:" in which he described the city as "unique, (with)
no other community in the world comparing to it. "8

In the nineteenth century, Frankfurt am Main was at the center of
religious reform and counter-reform. The liberal Jews were led by Abra-
ham Geiger (1810-1874), a native of the city and a leading scholar of

Wissenschaft des Judentums, while the traditional Jews attracted the
charismatic Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888) from Nickolsburg.9
A lesser known rabbi from the same era was Salomon Geiger
(1792-1878), the older brother of Abraham Geiger? He was a dayan
for the orthodox community and he was the guardian of the local syn-
agogal customs. In the summer of 1818 he began to keep a daily cultic
and liturgical journal in which he carefully recorded the minhagim of
Frankfurt am Main. Geiger completed this project in the summer of

1819, having finished the cycle of an entire year, and in 1862 published
the material in his book Divrey Kehibt.ll

Salomon Geiger' s Divrey Kehilot is fundamentally important for un-
derstanding the musical tradition of Frankfurt. In his precise account
of the orthodox community's rituals, Geiger included instructions as
to how each portion of the liturgy was to be chanted. He provided
cryptic descriptions of the nusah which are enlightening despite their
brevity. His comments about nusah usually refer to a section of the
liturgy as being chanted with a nigun yadua (well-known melody) or
a nigun nivhar (elected melody). Unfortunately, Geiger did not render
any of the nusah with musical notation. In fact, it is only reasonable
that he assumed his readers would be familiar with the "well-known
melodies!'

Nearly a century after Geiger began his effort to preserve the nusah

of Frankfurt am Main, two cantors felt a similar compulsion. Unlike

Geiger, who merely specified the proper places for employing a nigun

yadua ox a nigun nivhar, Fabian Ogutsch (18451922) and Selig Scheuer-
mann (1873-1935) were concerned that their local traditional melodies
were no longer "well-known? In response to their fears, each cantor
endeavored to record a thorough musical representation of Frankfurt's
synagogal chant.12 In 1912 Scheuermann produced his Die gottesdienst-
lichen Gesange der Israeliten while Ogutsch' sDer Frankfurter Kantor
was published in 1930, eight years after his death.

Ogutsch and Scheuermann probably had no idea how important a
contribution their respective works would be. Neither was aware that
within a few short years, their beloved Jewish community would be
obliterated, that their precious religious culture would be decimated.
As a result of their efforts, these cantors afforded the rest of the Jew-
ish world an opportunity to study the proud and ancient musical tra-
dition of Frankfurt am Main posthumously. In turn, they unlocked
the mysteries in Salomon Geiger' s Divrey Kehilot by supplying the mu-
sical notation which is absent in Geiger' s treatise Fortunately, Ogutsch' s
and Scheuermann's renditions usually corroborate each other and thus
they provide the necessary clues for deciphering Geiger' s codes, nigun
yadua and nigun nivhar.

In examining the nusah of Frankfurt am Main, it is important to
remember that this k' hilah zealously transmitted its particular customs
from one generation to the next. Works like Hahn's Yosef Ometz, Rash-
man' s Noheg K'tzon Yosef and Geiger' s Divrey Kehilot are all indica-
tive of the community's concern and reverence for their local minhagim.
Each of these compilations was inspired by the efforts of the great
rabbi Jacob Levi Molin from Mainz (1356-1427). Molin, known as the
Maharil, travelled throughout the Rhineland exerting tremendous in-
fluence in the realm of synagogue ritual and music? His injunctions
were still highly regarded in the twentieth century and it is no coinci-
dence that in the preface of Ogutsch' s Der Frankfurter Kantor, the fol-
lowing proscription of the Maharil is quoted: "In any locality, the
existing tradition must not be altered, even with regard to the melo-
dies, (and it is not to be changed) even by one who lives 1here."14

Such exactitude assures that, at least over the past six hundred years,
the nusah of Frankfurt am Main has experienced only a modicum of
change. Although Idelsohn qualified the Frankfurt nusah as being
"nothing but the German tradition with variants," 15 there existed an
unusual amount of passion for maintaining this city's nusah in its pure
form. The task of this paper is not only to demonstrate the continuity
of the community's nusah, but also to identify its musical origin. In
doing so, this project will provide evidence supporting Idelsohn' s claim

that this synagogal chant was indeed "originally a Semitic-oriental song,
(which) was transplanted to the banks of the Rhine and Main?

In Salomon Geiger's Divrey Kehilot, the description of the Frank-
furt minhagim begins with Adon Olam. Geiger records that on an or-
dinary Sunday morning, (the twenty-fourth of Nissan, 5578), the hazzan
would chant this opening piyut with the nigun hoi yadua (the well-
known weekday melody)? Of course, Geiger provides no information
about the chanting itself and the only available assistance exists in the
music of Ogutsch and Scheuermann. An examination of Ogutsch's and
Scheuermann's renditions of the Adon Olam for shaharit I'hol reveals
the nigun yadua to which Geiger refers (see Example 1.)

EXAMPLE 1

Nr.l

Oft? p«

mo-Ueh, V - to

- rem kol

J 1 J' J' jM J 1
f- ilr ihr-ro. V-

$E

I LAI

« 1.1.1

^ J*_ J

m. - li

i.m« *.i ■

1 . Adon olom.

Scheuermann

A. Der Schacharisgottesdienst .

m

A -don o-lom »- »ch«r mo-Uch b' tc-rem kol J' lir niv.ro, 1'

jj Ebenso das gnntt Gcbet.

The presented nusah is clearly in a pentatonic mode with two "chant-
tones" (scale steps on which the majority of the chanting is done),
which are a perfect fourth apart. These two chant-tones also function
as "pausal-tones" (scale steps which coincide with the commas in the

10

text). There is also a penultimate pick-up to the lower of the two chant-
tones, which is always a minor third below the chant-tone. As for the
final cadence of this chant, there appears to be some disagreement be-
tween Ogutsch and Scheuermann. The former prefers to end on the
lower of the two chant-tones. The latter chooses to close with the fla-
vor of a major mode by using the higher of the two chant-tones as
a tonic, approaching it diatonically in the lower octave? Perhaps
Ogutsch' s Eastern European training influenced his version of the pen-
tatonic chant, while Scheuermann's predominately Western European
music education contributed to his rendition. 19

The nusah for the opening Adon Olam is a fascinating item in and
of itself. It is the first part of the morning prayers chanted aloud by
the hazzan and thus it functions as a signal to the congregation. This
music is loaded with calendrical and liturgical information. In this in-
stance, the nusah tells the worshippers that this weekday is a normal
day without any alterations in the service. If, for example, it were rosh
hodesh, the chanting of Adon Olam would depart from the pentaton-
ic nusah and would be sung in a major mode. (See Example 2.) 20 The
congregation would expect major liturgical additions like hallel and
musaf, as well as the inclusion ofya'aleh v'yavo and the deletion of
tahanun. If it were Hanukkah, and Adon Olam would be sung to the
tune of Maoz Tzur reminding the kahal to add al hanisim and halle. 21

n ? . 35 c>iy p-n$

EXAMPLE 2
s in3 tf-1.7 can nibpp

Ogutsch

T

£U , ".Ti.i'U

■ k9ut mo-Ucb, B ■ U-rem kol j' - lit nhr.ro,

4> ^ hi- ■ i a IIh '■ 1 J^=fS=r*

iziAi

$ /. ; - ti±-

d ■'. JT,t J' J 1 ! ^Il»" 1* ^ J" r :

* If rJ •"»

On page 14 of Divrey Kehilot, Geiger's next comment about nusah
is for birkhat netilat yadayim. Again he writes that the appropriate
chant is the nigun yadua. Ogutsch and Scheuermann set this text in
the same pentatonic as that of the Adon Olam. The only variation be-
tween the two settings is that Scheuermann's anticipates the upcom-
ing brakhot, and cadences with motifs 1 and 2 (see glossary for all
motifs) (See Example 3).

Nr. 3 -fTy- PC"!2

E - l»o - he - nu, me - lech ho - mi - lorn

11

Ogutsch

w

J 1 }t D H '

-' -V - U ^1m jo - do - Jim.

11,1 I ' M '

Bo-ruch it-toh »-daimoj, Bo- rnch ai-toh *-daunoj. IUu . fo chol bo-nor u-nuT-U U-»

- jim. Bo-mch a-tob *-do-noi, c-lo -he-nnme-lech ho -d- lorn.

At this point in Divrey Kehilot, Geiger fails to mention any instruc-
tions for chanting. One might assume that the hazzan would continue
in the pentatonic mode until otherwise instructed. This assumption
is realized by Ogutsch and Scheuermann, but they both add a motivic
dimension to their cadences, a detail which was too minute for Geiger
to record. For example, Ogutsch and Scheuermann both set the bir-
khat asher yatzar in pentatonic, but they close the chatimah with mo-
tifs 1 and 2. These motifs suggest a tonality in a minor mode, a charac-
teristic which will dominate the nusah of the upcoming barukh
she-amar.

For the birkhot hashahar, Geiger admonishes that the hazzan should
sing the first brakhah in a loud voice and the second b'rakhah in a
slightly softer voice, so that he should not skip one of the brakhot.22
Corresponding with Geiger' s advice, both Ogutsch and Scheuermann
provide pentatonic renditions for twobmkhot, with each of their respec-
tive couplets making a musical distinction between the first and sec-
ond blessings. For example, Scheuermann's first b'rakhah ends with
motif 3, an ornamental figure in harmonic minor which will be dis-
cussed below in greater detail. (See Example 4.)

EXAMPLE 4

S »1,MJ\ Jl,

Ogutsch

f j i jijjTuij.iiJJU J JJ J

Bo-ruA »l-toh »-<Uu-noj, K-lma- M-m me-ledi ho

wi - Jioh nwr-dria Mb j«m « - wen loj' - tak. Bo - nch it - toh * - d.u-noj

nJMm «-w*b loj'

I' i i p ' p P P p > p r

f' t ijljjij>j l j, I J;iJ i M I M iJiNil 1 l 1 l 'jJiJMJ)''

ho - 6- lom j [i horchin ben jom n-ven

Bo-rachi-toh a . do. no! a . lo - he-no me-lecb.
U-sech wi

&* J - J J^ I J JiJ JtJi l ^^J-WJ JUUiJMJ^J Ji l J JiJ Jp l jij,^

In the Frankfurt tradition, all of the aforementioned proceedings
occur before putting on a talit or t'filin. It is only after the korbanot
are read that the hazzan holds his talit in his hands and chants the
brakha out loud 23 Ogutsch provides a pentatonic setting of this
b'rakhah in pentatonic and he mentions that the birkhot tefdlin are
sung in the identical nusah. Scheuermann, on the other hand, simply
skips from the birkhot hashahar to barukh she-amar, pausing only to
note that the intervening prayers should be done in the mode of bir-
khot hashahar (pentatonic).

Before Geiger continues into P'sukey d'zimrah, he writes about a
custom which Ogutsch also mentions. 24 Immediately preceding barukh
sheamar, the hazzan would call out the following phrase: yafe shtikah
b 'shaat hatefillah.25 The hazzan, standing at his seat, would wait a mo-
ment for quiet before proceeding to sing barukh sheamar in its entire-
ty^ After completing this chanting, he would continue leading the
service from his seat as a signal that the congregation had not reached
the core of the service sh 'ma uvirkhoteha.27

The nusah for p'sukey d'zimra follows the path set earlier by motifs
1 and 2. (See Example 5.) The basic chant is in minor, but identifying
the mode is somewhat complicated. Both Ogutsch and Scheuermann
begin with motif 4, but while Ogutsch' s use of the motif decorates the

13

tonic, Scheuermann's application of the motif centers around the dom-
inant. Subsequently, Ogutsch's setting is clearly in harmonic minor with
the seventh scale step functioning as a leading tone. Scheuermann's
rendition is modally ambiguous. The seventh scale step is lowered when
it functions as a chant-tone or when it appears in motif 4. It is, how-
ever, raised when it occurs in motif 3.

Nr.6 TgNP T 1 ?

EXAMPLE 5

Vor TQJ* fn» rult der Vorbtur: n^WTJ ruffa n£ nfrflp

^B

mm

m

¥ f. .'li.il ILL

- tiich-bo-c)

2. Boruch scheomar.

Lttngmm.getmgtn.

w" ho^o ho-o . lorn. bwoch ha, bo-raeh o.se V-re schis baradi o-

' ki-jem,boruchirfra-chemal ho-o - re*, boroch nf r» .

mer V o-«b, bo-rach go s<

chem al hatf ri jos, bo-mch n/scha-Iem s

r toTli-re-ov/uo-rnchchai load w'-ka-

J J Ni II II wm 1'JJj l JJJ Ji l J>J>J^JiJil

Jom lo-ne-zach, bd-rnch jxwfeh u-tna-zil, bo-rnch scK mo, borocfa » • toh a-do-noi, e-lo.

■ i,ii iiiiin i m j' j' ji jju jt-jij > i j ju jm

he-nn meJech ho-o -lorn, ho. 61 ho-ov ho-ra-ch»-monham hu-lol V fl *-mo, rrf

A , Sehlufi.

Me-lech nrf aehn-boch t

"JJ'U J'J'J^J'l

i - fo. or »-<!• id sett mo hi-go-dol ho-rnch m

noi, me-lech nf In 101 bt-tiach - bo-chos.

3 ffcfiso a«M rfer erst* Sat* mm

aHoddlitdonoikiniittauo Wuoi

Ttaud'cbo uj.v. hit Jlschtabach.

14

Motif 3, which first appeared in Scheuermann's birkhot hashahar,
is more of an ornamental turn than a separate motif. In fact, without
it, Scheuermann's setting could be seen as being in a pentatonic mode
which is similar to that of the weekday amidah. But due to the pres-
ence of motif 3 and the fact that Scheuermann closes the brakha with
motif 2, the entire unit can be viewed as being in minor.

In either case the nusah functions with motif 4 as an opening state-
ment, followed by a chant-tone and two alternating pausal-tones. The
tonic is Ogutsch's chant-tone and the third and fourth scale steps are
his pausal-tones. In Scheuermann's setting the dominant is the chant-
tone, while the lowered seventh scale step and the tonic are the pausal-
tones. Both renditions employ motif 2 at the end of the b'rakhah.

For the sake of comparison, it is interesting to glance at Baer's Barukh
Sheamar, no. 23. (See Example 6.) There is no question that the em-
ployed mode is minor and the closing of the b'rakhah resembles that
of Ogutsch and Scheuermann. However, Baer's chant-tones and pausal-
tones are quite different from the Frankfurt nusah. Even more notice-
able is the absence of motif 4.

EXAMPLE 6

r r ' ' ru g

' k "" hta *"*'" * r "-^ ^^±

*fr

* " *"*" rn. T" " , r ™

it »'luj.jom U>..e»ch

i" I , ,T) l ' m ^^mmms^^m^*

r' i ■ l ..... . i ^-j

^m

__ Solo ,-r-.

At this juncture in the liturgy Geiger's Divrey Kehilot is mute. The
text does not offer any specific information about the nusah for p'sukey
dezimra. Scheuermann follows Geiger's lead and merely instructs that
the ensuing material should be chanted in the minor which ended the
b'rakhah of barukh sheamar.28 Quite surprisingly, Ogutsch's notation
for this section is considerably detailed and it is filled with musical
allusions to Biblical cantillation.

On pages 7-9 of Ogutsch's Der Frankfurter Kantor, there are two
possibilities for chanting the p'sukey dezimra. (See Example 7.) The
second of the two is composed in a harmonic minor mode which is
very similar to Baer's rendition. It follows on the heels of motif 2 of
the barukh she-amar and carries through to the end of p'sukey dezim-
ra, where it smoothly modulates to major for yishtabah.29

Nr. 7 K-vpn T?!D?

Ogutsch

JW_Ji Ji i Ji Ji j

Hau - du I»- d»u- noj, Ut - u wisch-nuui, hwi-dl- <

y ji jjij.ji|r )j^n ^i i yi

Hsu- du la-diu-noj.kir-1

^E

" i J, I p f f m t M j Vt MM g

W»-» - Di b'-chw.-d'.dio wo-Udi-tt, Jo-gil Ub-bl bl-»dUI-

J ' Ltf M iji ' 'I'L I

cho, o-schi-rob U-d«i - noj, kl £o - mi! o loj

Rail - ma - maua Kl big- rail- nom, w* - cbi-rew pi . [1- jau« V jo-dom, U

1 ,1 I

hub b'- ko-moh wag-gau jim, Uu-che-chain b»l- u - mlm, la- i.auir mai-cae-bem V

,''i> J\ J) ,\ i r p j } T } } | J j | | | il J> Jl 3l Jl

IS w - sel la- a-naus bo- hem misch-pol ko -

1 1 i j N ■■ i ' 'l !l f ' '' " " ''"" ' " "I

mw. bo-ior bn - V chol Aa- Ml - dow, ha - la - hi - job. D-mo-

iitii'. ^y '■ i L.!. | ifj.i. n i

Example 7

J^ Jiji ^ J^

V bar aa-du lo-n'eho, mo-c

Ogutsch

* jtj> ■■" Jl * i ' O ' J !L-

po . il - to A'du - noj, — mik- do«ch

c/-b(f-j »Jt ji p pi

«oT kmo-»-« jo-d.

f "I T '

luck r - ui - lorn «

(40 A-du-noj jlm-luch !•- u - lorn

A-diu-noj jim-

ji h h h

■ «d, U-U-dau-Doj hunm'lu.cho n-maa-achel bag-giu-jlm <

^PP

i J> Jl J l Ji :

im tfbar tij-jun, lischput e

hu i . mow, W-ho-j -

" nrtu-dio, W- ko- job A-dau-ooj i' - me- lech tl kol ho-o-rei, baj - jaW la-
ku ji - H - jek A- dan -noj « - chod u - acttman e -

-diod. n-wWu-ra-w-cbo k

tfr. 8 n?T? rrip v«mu, <.»i«..«*i: -j— ^ T *

W'cko- iMt L-mauhab-Vria, Io-mSb m •- - res hakklt-ui

V j Jl i r r m igl i Jl i Jl Jl * J) ]l J '* '■ '

Hi -ddt - tt bo - i-iu - xT — W - hap - pH - d w" - In - jVra - Ml w"

bffSb-go-Mki lo- mm r-MT-u Wa-jaa-acha A-daa - boJzL_ M|.

f i p , mm iuiTh i i fflT g mLlm j, i

" Jama ha- - h. « jlM- ro-H Sjj-Jad ^~ l mli-nTI T .Jim.

Sodaaa Torbatar. _

t'o jjj fa a jji 1 1 j

n- la-daa-aoj hau-mlu-cho u-mau-achel bag-gM-jtm. Wb- hi Kauai- In An dj-

f' I 'In I I I j.^ir/MicjrrlS^rj,^ , !

jaaa Back-pan nhar (-mow, «' ho. J- MOk la-daa- aoj &r . . mlu cko, w'-ho-

Example 7 Ogutsch

- I«ch »l kol ko-o - m, H -

f' ;^ 1 1' i> n n , j 1

jeh A-du-noj a-diod u-kUuh «■ ckod._

rr.9 PgOfT T

f i n , Hi^ihiii i " m "i 'i i i ■ iii' 1 kU i l ii:

3 j^-ub-kkdi. Ko-duuWkudoMU mt-at-tok V-ri «■ - loS bo. nick lUt* A-aiuaj,

El me-leck, go-dwl b*t-U»cfc- ko duuu, ffl k*. - kui - do - in »-duu ku-nif - li

ft jj ■ U'^ip^ i '1 'iTi' i i r m ' j n jj

««,_ b»k.b»B-ck«r V Kkl - r« . tim-rak an - ledi, E, cM ko - u - lo-mia.

The first of Ogutsch' s weises is in a major tonality which utilizes
only the first six steps of the scale. The chant-tones and pausal-tones
in the initial statement are scale steps 1 and 3, while the cadential fig-
ure concludes on tonic (motif 5). The second statement begins with
scale step 4 as the chant-tone and pauses on scale step 2 by way of
motif 6. This phrase is followed by motif 5, thus concluding the sec-
ond statement in the same manner as the first. Another example of
the second statement is set for the text umatzata Iivavo neeman Ufa-
hekha, in which both motifs 6 and 8a precede the cadential motif 5.

Motifs 6, 8a and 5 are direct quotes from the shirat hayam melody
of the Frankfurt tradition." They appear several times in Ogutsch' s
setting of p'sukey dezimra, the most obvious being on the verse adonai
yimlokh I'olam vaed which closes the Biblical Song of the Sea." This
appearance of theshirah melody cannot be coincidental, especially con-
sidering that Ogutsch renders the preceding verse, tvieymo vetita-eymo,
according to the standard cantillation of the Pentateuch. Furthermore,
the initial statement of this nusah for p'sukey d'zimm closely resem-
bles the more simple versions of ihep'sukey d'zimm melody from Iberia
and Carpentras.32

Still another setting of the concluding portions of p'sukey d'zimra
employs the motifs of the shirah melody. In this case, the nusah ap-
plies only when there is to be a brit milah. Ogutsch writes that the

18

hazzan introduces this section with the text umatzata livavo neeman
lifanekha. Interestingly enough, he provides these words with the ex-
act setting mentioned above. After this introduction, the sandek and
the mohel (or the hazzan) sing responsively, v'kharot imo habrit through
vayosha hashem. Their chant opens with the brit milah motifs A and
B, succeeded by the shirah melody motifs 6, 8a and 5. (Motif 7 also
appears, but it is not part of the shirah melody. This motif will be dis-
cussed later in the context of sh'ma uvirkhoteha.) Following the read-
ing of the shirat hay am, the hazzan chants ki i'adonai ham'lukhah in
the simple shirah melody which began the p'sukey d'zimra. He then
sings the remaining verses beforeyishtabah in a metered melody which
is based on the shirah melody motifs.

This brit milah tradition is not particular to Frankfurt am Main, but
is part of the general German Jewish minhag. Baer records this cus-
tom for the texts vaani b'hasd'kha mizmor litodah and rom'mot elbigro-
nam (verses 6-9 of Psalm 149)33 (See Example 8) Each of these settings
employs motifs A and B, but none of them uses any of theshirah melo-
dy motifs. However, in his rendition of the mohel singingv'kharot imo
habrit, Baer not only uses motifs A and B, but also motifs 6 and 5.
In addition, Baer includes motifs 7 and 8b, the latter of which serves
the same penultimate function as motifs 8 and 8a.

EXAMPLE 8
-pens -aw

Baer

HnH

n-nnb ■nOTO^ p«i»i.m..

•##»

Example 8

Ro .

m- mo,

1 cl

Of- TO

•■"""

WA,.,

rr» ,i.Q . jo

' V J^

/°°

(;,-

'^~*_

J; >-h ■

. ji>

H ] l n ^

,.Lii' .'

■ : M L f 'r

^~sft

stem

•ik .

"* k '**

f r *n

. .el J* *

With the closing of p'sukey d'zimra, Geiger records in Divrey Kehi-
lot that the hazzan no longer leads from his seat but rather from the
lecturn facing the ark. The hazzan chants only the word yistabah, to
introduce the coming of the central portion of the service. (See Exam-
ple 9.) Ogutsch follows these directions precisely, setting only the first
word of the paragraph. Both Ogutsch and Scheuermann render this
word in major and via this major they enter a pentatonic mode for
the closing b'rakhah. This usage of the pentatonic is quite similar to
that of the repetition of the amidah I'hol As was the case in birkhot
hashahar, Ogutsch tends to pause on scale steps 4-3 wile Scheuermann's
pausal-tones are 6-5. Baer, in his inimitable central European style,
records his so-called Deutsche weise in a fashion identical to that of
Ogutsch. (See Example 10.) Baer and Ogutsch even set the word haboher
with the identical six-note run. 34 Despite the fact the Geiger makes no
mention of a nigun yadua there clearly appears to be one.

EXAMPLE 9

fr. 8 l"OT?T!

3 .dscb-Ub-bkdf Bra-dun w'biadoan mi-st-tob w-ui u- Ira' bo- nidi at-toh A-dw

B me-ledi, go-dul l»t-Uadi- bo- duns, D ba-luo-

i-duibu-Bit-lo-

|> 4J » J J gj^

1*ln^ ' iu tT

V Khi - r! - rim-rob nw - icdt. El, ch* bo - w . lo- mim.

Jlacb-taJMchsdiim-cho lo-«d nml-ko-nn. Bo-rnch a-toh a -do- not, el mo-lech go-

«r*r p I r r HP

P^

dol ba- tisch-bo-c
el hm ho-do.t
•don hm nif-lo.<

ba-bo-chcr b' scbi-ra aim ro me-lecta «1 chr bo- o -lo - ralm.

EXAMPLE 10

nan:?"-)

iHl

al.kt.U k..d

_ l v ji _!■ > I ji-j-j

PP

j , iff ? jttj a i ^i

l.k ».(f wi.nb I' Ul.lob »' «T .

Example 10

21

Baer

mm

For the hatzi kaddish before barekhu Geiger is still silent with re-
gard to nusah. Yet, again, a nigun yadua surfaces in the music of
Ogutsch and Scheuermann. (See Example 11.) In both settings the major
mode is employed identically. The chant-tones are scale steps 1 and
3 while the phrases pause with a 3-2-1 pattern. The final cadence sur-
prisingly recalls motifs 1 and 2, injecting a minor element to this litur-
gical bridge The result is a model recapitulation of the nusah for birkhot
hashahar and p'sukey d'zimra; the end of yishtabah employs the pen-
tatonic and the hatzi kaddish utilizes both modal possibilities.

EXAMPLE 11

Ogutsch

fr.10 e

&^=

^Tp

,

} jS ^ _s

^y

Jt J> J) 1

" Ji>gid- (Ul w^Ukidduch (ch'-m* rmb . bob

=4-^

dl-wVo chir-n -

«*, Vja»

-Ucb m»LdHi-

^T"

-r- 3 ! — t — r

T

— < — v^

T

mi

b'cha-ji-chaua

h "*h h h

■ ii-<tti

- j< Jr.

dial ba jl«

b»- »-gq-

lo

—>

j.. jiji j, J,

44

Jto-1

w-nob. V-jitth-Ub-bMh

V-Jto-po-

^E

^p

=^=#=

r* Jii- ru-munw'-jli-iiu-ii, w" . jli - hid - dar V- jl«- tl -

Example 11

Ogutsch

m=m

ippfi

4. Kadisch und Bonchu.

Jis-ga-dalw' jis kdasch sctf ma nuho, h'-ol mo div-ro chi -ni-Be V jam-lichmal-chn-

g' f'- jiju i i i i ,n a ji i j m j. ji ji i j » j » j » j.

se, h' cha- je-chon u-y jo-m«-chon u - v' cha-jt

j> j* j l 1 1 1 ^ r p g ip

ba - a - go - loh u . vis - man ko. riv w' im -

/M *h «■ , , i > y _h

1 j, > h J> >■ h

tF*=l

ffi ^ *' i p p g g g J1 J1 J1 :

Jis - ho - rach V jisch . ta- bach w' jis - po
Jt-& — V i ■ w l K t>bt>iK t> fc, b I — t;

. ar V- jis . ro-mam V ji

n j 1 i

s M-

se, V-jis-ha-dor V jis a - le V jis ha-lol sch'

f * ' ' II '1 11 'il 1

me d' kuischo b' rich ha,

J'. J! J'r JM J J

1' e-

loh min kol hir - cho - so w 1 schi - ro - so tuschbf cho - so w"

a muTjnb'ol-mo.Vic

The formal shaharit service is liturgically introduced by the call to
worship, the barekhu. The drama which is inherent in this part of the
t'filah is reflected in the nusah. (See Example 12.) Geiger specifically
admonishes that the hazzan should lengthen the chanting of the
barekhu in order to allow the kahal to add private tehinot and various

23

p'sukim.35 Ogutsch and Scheuermann respond with an identical ren-
dition in major which is written with sustained notes that allow for
the congregational insertions. Geiger continues with an instruction that
the hazzan should softly recite barukh hash&n ham'vorakh simultane-
ously with the kahal in order to avoid eliciting a response of "amen?
Accordingly, Ogutsch and Scheuermann do not provide a setting for
barukh adonai, etc. So strong was this custom in the German syna-
gogue that Baer gives the same explanation as Geiger in cautioning
German cantors not to sing the response as a solo. 37

EXAMPLE 12

^ I f l_\

Scheuermann

Bo-ra - cho es a-do-noi ham' to- mch.

The barekhll, like the adon Olam, serves as a vehicle for communicat-
ing liturgical changes in a service. The nusah for such texts musically
imparts this information to the congregation. In the case of barekhu,
an embellished version of the standard weekday nusah informs the wor-
shippers that on this particular day tahanun is not recited.38 (See Ex-
ample 13.) Also, this same message would be delivered the preceding
evening at the beginning of the arvit where the exact nusah is applied.39

Ogutsch

For the sh'ma uvirkhoteha Geiger specifically states that the hazzan
chants in the nigun yadua. 40 Ogutsch and Scheuermann produce set-
tings which not only correlate in terms of identifying the nigun yadua,
but also closely resemble the cantillation of the Pentateuch for the High
Holy Days.41 (See Example 14.) The nusah consists of a five part chant
in major beginning on scale step five and pausing on scale step 6. The
second musical phrase is motif 6, the same which occurred in theshirah
melody. The third phrase is motif 7 while the fourth and fifth phrases
are motifs 8 and 5 respectively. The most striking qualities about this
chant are the order of the motifs and the pure form in which they ap-
pear. Whereas in Ogutsch' sp'sukey d' zimra these motifs do not always
appear in sequence, in the nusah for sh 'ma uvrikhoteha they establish
a pattern which is unmistakably related to taamey hamikra V yamin
nor-aim.

Nr.l3iyp

EXAMPLE 14

Ogutsch

^ Jl ' j> ^jJ'SLttL H 5 B ii * i '

mMduni-imV-jir- oh ja-dttd V-kanl, <Hw- ra 3-lu-Um ehij-jtm u - me-Iech u - lom.

matUut l'-cho a-tya-ckad-dio V-
T ■ . T

^

fC*

it-tok A-d»u-noJ kab-but-d

Scheuermann

6. Kulom *huvim.

Kn-lom a-hu-vim ko- lom V rn-rim ko . lorn gi -bo-rim V-cho-lom o-alm V-
V chn-lompos'chim m pl-hem Wk-dn- scbo u - ▼' toho-re V scbi-ro nr'aim-ro

^ij;.IUi; j ji i j ii i

, Etento L' hakdlsch, or etodosch.

| wahtrtena l'teholom, ram w* alto,

scUro dudoscnok und tar jiaroal.

While Scheuermann's chant for sh'ma uvirkhoteha employs an un-
adulterated form of the cantillation for High Holy Days, his rendi-
tion of taamey hamikm I'yamim nomim incorporates motifs from other
systems of cantillation ,42 (See Example 15.) The same phenomenon
occurs in his recording of the shirah melody .43 (See Example 16.) Idel-
sohn explains that "the additional motives were taken from other
modes, from the (cantillation of the) Pentateuch and the Prophets?
He continues by asserting that "the custom of borrowing from other
modes is characteristic of the Ashkenazic traditional song. "44 There-
fore, it is important to refer to a more simple presentation of the can-
tillation which does not include extraneous motifs.

EXAMPLE 15

Scheuermann

7. Thoravorlesung an Rosch haschonoh und Schachris too Jom Kippur.

ji ii in J? j 1 1 m fl^tf t run Mm nfl m

Sar - koh n - gol mn naeh nnnach r" - ▼! - a, ma-

ji U TTil|»|i nn i I Qff I? 1 1

pachpaseh4a.ao.krf ko-ton, so-kof go dol bwmoo tip-cho esnadt-to, po-

i t u"^ n mi 1 1 i n in i mnnr^-r-wn

«r, 1* Uachok" tk.nST i U-achog'ao-loh, kad-mo w , .aa4oh.as-lo

fi,1 iih u n^ rrc rm ii l i m ll , f F i J3T_ ii M, i u i

gerMch,Kcrscha'jin, dar-ko, d*. rtrTlL J' liv p' ilk cof ha-ptrschoh.

EXAMPLE 16

Scheuermann
3. Die Schiroh: Os joschir moscheh.

JH' i Ji JJWi ^ i j^ jiii g ppj ^ pp jj i jiiJ^^ i jj jiji i

Os Joschir mo -schehn-v'ne jls-ro-al eahaschirohha-sos lt-a-do - nol wajom-

j 1 jjji iU i'i'iw ininu'iTi u > i r JW l | l | i

rn le-mor: Oschlm la-a-do-noiki go-oh go-oh

Jom, o • si w'siffl iom Joh wai-hl li 11-schnoh, s«h e - li Van ve-lia e-lo-heo

^■Owj' i i jpp i f'rppittr'Jpp i ^nr.

o-ma-oenhtt, a-do-noi isch milcho-moh
iditmtOachlnmrd
rn laidoBol. Ehtnto sonWr.-w'hamajlm lo

26

On page 59 of Jewish Music, Idelsohn's sample of the cantillation
is nearly identical to the nusah for sh'ma uvirkhoteha of Scheuermann
and quite similar to that of Ogutsch. (See Example 17.) Idelsohn's
pashta-zakef katan exactly matches motif 6 and his tipha munah et-
nahta is related to motif 7. Idelsohn's tipha in the siluk clause appears
as motif 8 in Scheuermann's work and Idelsohn's sofpasuk is very
close to motif 5.

EXAMPLE 17

Leviticus in. i-s

2 fc ;■;>;<

Mi r i frJ i ;>iJvoj f i

Vay-dab-ber a-do-nay el mo-she, a-cha-re

1^1 ■ 'O

she-ne he fie a-ha-ron,

bekor-vo-somlif-ne a-do-noy way-yo - mu-su . way-yo-mer a-do-noy

ft pp^J. I J'g ^ jJjij jHM,

el mo-she,

r

j

el a-ha-ron o-hi-cho,ve-alyo-vo

r

UJ ^Jl^P £ r^ ^

becholes el hak-ko-desh,mibes lap-po-ro-ches, elp'nehak4apo-rea_a-sher

C l. : =. : .J

alho-o-ronve-lo yo-mus, ki be-o-n

e-to-e alhaMcap-po«a

Only the first of the five phrases of the nusah is elusive, but it can
be identified by evaluating its function. lust like a mapakh, this phrase
operates as an introductory motif leading toward a pausal motif (mo-
tif 6). It differs from the mapakh in its chant-tone (scale step 2), but
it uses another chant-tone which is prominent in the High Holy Day
cantillation (scale step 5). The phrase's pausal-tone (scale step 6) is mere-
ly a neighbor tone in the same way it appears in Ogutsch' s birkhat
hatorah liyamim hanoraim.45

In comparing the Frankfurt nusah of p'sukey d'zimm and sh'ma
uvirkhoteha, similarities and discrepancies are apparent. Motif 6 is con-
sistent in both applications. Motif 8, however, differs somewhat from
motif 8a Ogutsch' s variation of motif 8 fills the same role in its penul-
timate position, but it approaches the pausal-tone via a descending

27

line and an appoggiatura rather than by an ascending line. Motif 7,
which usually does not appear in p 'sukey d'zimra, is utilized in a con-
tracted form in v'kharot into habrit for a brit milah.

Motif 5 is realized in slightly different forms depending on the con-
text. In the shirah melody it emphasizes scale steps 3-2-1, whereas in
the cantillation and in the sh'ma uvirkhoteha it highlights scale steps
2 and I while also including the leading tone.

Determining a pure source for the nusah of Frankfurt am Main re-
quires a further examination of Idelsohn' s research on cantillation. He
compares the Ashkenazic cantillation for the High Holy Days to the
Sephardic-Oriental cantillation for the book of Job, the so-called Job
mode. 46 (See Example 18.) The cantillation for High Holy Days "pos-
sesses points of similarity" to the Job mode and "may be regarded
as a transference from the Job mode. "47 Those similarities are the mo-
tivic similitudes, the tetrachordal nature of the chants and the use of
a major third. Differences lie in the usage of the fifth scale step. In
the Job mode the fifth scale step appears incidentally while in the can-
tillation for High Holy Days its function is more pronounced.

EXAMPLE 18 T , , ,

Idelsohn
Sephardio-Oriental

\ , >

1

Yo-badyom iw-wa-led bo, we-hal-lay-Ia a-mar ho-ra ga-ber..

hay-yom ha-hu ye-hi ho-shech, al y id-re -she -hu e lo - ha

i n A i a i i i'i 1 1 Yi 1 1 h'nnj i

mim-ma - al. we-al to - fa a - law ne-ha-ra.

There is more evidence to suggest that the Job mode and the cantil-
lation for High Holy Days are closely related. According to Idelsohn,
the Ashkenazim lost their tradition of chanting the book of Job on
tisha b'av after the reading of Lamentations. They are, however, the
only group of Jews who have a special cantillation for the High Holy
Days. Idelsohn explains further:

The reason for changing the tune for the High Holidays and for
employing especially the Job mode may be this: The Zohar says
(Lev. 16) that while reading on the Day of Atonement the por-
tion of Leviticus 16 in which the sudden death of the children
of Aaron is mentioned, every one should shed tears, and that who-
ever expresses his sorrow over the death of the children of Aaron
may be sure that his own children will not die during his life. Be-
cause of these instructions old editions of the Ashkenazic Mach-
zor like that of Salonica, 1550, carried a mark on this portion,
in order that this text be read in a tune different from the usual
one, a tune which expresses complaint and sadness. The search
for such a tune led to the mode of Job which had had no func-
tion in the Ashkenazic rite and suited these requirements. The
Ashkenazim took this mode at first for the reading of the Pen-
tateuch on the Day of Atonement; later they extended its use also
to the days of Rosh Hashana. It is interesting to notice that in
the ancient communities of Germany, like Frankfort-on-the-Main,
only the main portions read from the first scroll are chanted in
the Job mode, while the portions read from the second scroll are
chanted in the usual Pentateuch mode.48

Having demonstrated the correlation between the nusah of Frank-
furt am Main and the cantillation for High Holy Days, and having
shown the relationship between that cantillation and the Job mode,
the resulting equation is clear; the nusah for the sh 'ma uvirkhoteha
in Frankfurt am Main is based on ancient cantillation which, accord-
ing to Idelsohn, dates back to the Second Temple period.49 Further-
more, the nusah for the p'sukey d'zimm, which employed the same
motifs found in the sh'ma uvirkhoteha, is also related to the Job mode
Again, it must be asserted that the motifs common to both the p'sukey
d'zimm and the sh'ma uvirkhoteha are found in Scheuermann's rendi-
tion of the shirah melody and that his version is an ornamented varia-
tion of the melodies of the Portuguese and of the French in Carpentras.
In its most simple form (Carpentras) it is tetrachordal with a major
third and in its metered form (Portuguese) it reflects motifs 8 and 5,
both of which occur in the Job mode. 50

Aside from the nigun yadua for sh'ma uvirkhoteha, Geiger also
records that the keriat sh'ma should be read by the congregants in 'a
soft voice according to the cantillation of the Pentateuch. He also writes
that the rabbi of the congregation chants out loud from I'maan yirbu
through the word emet.51 Neither Ogutsch nor Scheuermann provide

29

any setting of the keriat sh'ma, but Baer does.52 (See Example 19.)
Ogutsch, however, includes another specification which Geiger never
mentions. Immediately before the keriat sh'ma if tahanum is not said,
the nusah for haboher b'ama yisrael b'ahavah is different from the usual
cadence, motifs 8a and 5. (See Example 20.)

EXAMPLE 19

^R-ICr 1 POD-'*

BlvCT

^'i^tiLi^iu^'i 1 !!!^.^

^

*S=1

EXAMPLE 20

A final admonition from Geiger concerns the elimination of a haf-
sek between birkhat geuiah and the a mi da h. Geiger instructs that the
kahai stops reading before the word goaleynu and the hazzan chants
from Tzur Yisrael until the b'rakhah. The congregation then joins the
hazzan and quietly recites the hatimah along with him.53 Ogutsch
records a similar custom, but he also includes an alternate setting of
TzurYisrael for the occasion of a brit miiah. (See Example 21.) Ogutsch
employs the same metered melody which he uses in his setting of v'alu
moshiim for a brit milah.54 (See Example 22.) By comparison Baer's
Tzur Yisrael for a circumcision actually incorporates brit miiah motif
A into his melody .55 (See Example 23.)

tfr. 14 n?nn n"rtf u-d ^-itp -us f Ur ^ „n,

Ogutsch

EXAMPLE 22

ft' J iJ'lp' JJ» I 1 I Tp l rn S Cj i T l rS^ 1 ri ¥#P

Example 2

31

Ogutsch

fe

> ^ _> J\

^=^=

> | > J

■ 1 h T\ JR

F

&F

oil A-dall-noj 1

. me - l«4

Hi M ho

t ^ <.£

J J^ ■» gg

h» - nu jl - «'-

r

IP

Jt J ' jl jl J' J. j" r " '^

^d^' T

— ■& T

■o arfdio ko-araw l«.m»nr,

F

LI. Li.

=f?f

l^tt

ir^

1 J J^ ^

1 f.'ir' 1 * '

EXAMPLE 23

|/V ... I u M T t

— j L t rT=^ —

; _i. _» .''. =*=

ft ■ .1 Ji. .M^ ^jj ■

loll Wjii.t. . fl ^(g. 1 It .

- " * * , -"t 7 Lj" -

-i-v,- , >,-^=

lot* jb . „ .

ir '.t-^. *J ' ■ [ f n p p ? ? ' ' ? r^ — r-? — p— ^

»^y, Jv - 1 ?" I '-==L^

^' f ' ?

* V^r^ ■ r* t

Geiger does not provide any musical information for the repetition
of the amidah. Both Ogutsch and Scheuermann render the nusah in
pentatonic. (See Example 24.) Unlike the settings for birkhot hasha-
har, this version of the pentatonic mode is universally used by Ash-
kenazim. Ogutsch provides still another musical reminder for when
tahanun is not recited. (See Example 25.) In this case, the final f rak-
ha of the amidah, Ogutsch' s setting immediately precedes the place
where tahanun would normally be said.58

Nr. 15 {TlfrX HJPtf ~

EXAMPLE 24

Ogutsch

J^ Ji Ji

^ p I i p M P ' p r P -^ ^

I - ton e - but - ho jti - chok *«- laa . M ja - a kamr, ho

< c n j i p p i n ' ' , T|1 J '

ted hag- gib. bur whan -nan . m, ft A - jaun, gm - mil eha-an-dlm Uu-

£ Ji ^ Ji | m ! i* ! ' i I p r p"i li 1'fe ^

vim w' kau - nS hak-kuil, W- iu. chir chaw - <( o - 'warn, n - m«-wi gan-
a Uw-a* V-io-hem r ma-aa Kh'-mau tf-a hi woh,_ M-lrtu-* a- man-

aVhi-a a-mo.gtn bo - inch at - toh A- dm.

^^

Nr. 16 (Tjrij?

Wkad-de«di « schim-dio bo -au- lorn, V Khtm adiem-mak-dl - acklm u - aaau biach-me mo-

J' P 1 P ' r- P' r g

raum kak-ke-«auw al jad rf - wi - • - d

j J' Jl | p" j M p J ^J. | | || | j| |1 | |ll J^ ^^

Uam-mo-NOm bo- rich ju-m« - tu. D-wWw-r* hod- teV Ao fco-aauw [« . mam.

Xr.tt Schlufl der T° . T

,» f $ j r p j ; ii " i " " h > ! i * '

^^Wtauw V • I - n. - cho f - w - rfch .. am-m'Ao jin - ro - a V - ehol

e» n-w'chol Mho- oh bitch- Iu - n - <mo bo - met at- toh Adaa-noJ

mm

Scheuermann

6. Sctfmoneh esreh.

Example 24

iii^

33

Scheuermann

^PPP

o-home-lo- ho jli-chok we-lo - he Ja-S-kov, ho- el ha-go-dol ha-gi -

bor w'ha-no-ro SI el -jon, go-met cha -so -dim to-vim ■w' ko - ne ha-kol.Wso-

j Jl J J, 'cjp m P ' r P p-p P i mp

cher chas-do o - voa, n - me-Ti go - cl Ut - no w' no - hem 1'- ma- an sch'

' ^ > P P

V - a - ha . voh, me Ice

1 a - do-noi mo - gen

SHipP

pa, bo-ruch a -
ii. i. 10. Die $tr7K«Sch'monchesreh.

EXAMPLE 25

Nr. 18 aching dw ITg M Tigeo, .ui dciwi. kein paw geketet w

Ogutsch

For tahanun Geiger again does not specifically allude to a nigun
yadua. In comparing the music of Ogutsch and Scheuermann, there
does appear to be an established nusah. (See Example 26.) Each of
the renditions begins with a simple chant in major which is best known
in North America for the chanting of ashrey on Shabbat. It is also
the nusah used in Frankfurt am Main for the chanting of the psalms
of Kabbalat Shabbat.57 The closing for tahanun is in major and it in-
corporates motifs 8a and 5.

Ogutsch

7. Tach5nun. (Montae und Donnerstae.)
a a) Adonoi elohe jUroel.

^P

A - do . no! « - lo - he jis .

cho, w' hi - no-chem al ho

fr iiijUH r i p I - ri i Jl ^ J ^ 1 1 1 ^JUiii' P P ^

U-v'-cholsossctum-choloscho-chach-na no al tisch-ko-ehe-nu,a-do-noie- 1'>- he jis-ro-el

^ r p {i r P i — *''*' - - ^ - ^ — - ^i*i * **• ^ 3<fa«^»u"grirt.

schnvmo-cha-rona -pc-cho,w hl-no-chemal ho-ro-oh 1' *- me-rho.

For the Kedushah d'sidra Geiger gives instructions about which verses
the hazzan and the kahal say out loud.58 The musical application is
clearly delineated by Ogutsch whose settings of Psalm 145 and the
Kedushah d'sidra continue in the same mode and motifs that are sung
for tahanun. 59 (see Example 27.) Scheuermann writes that the remainder
of the service is chanted in the same nusah.60

EXAMPLE 27

H'^ lJlJIJI | JliJi

Ogutsch

UUhU

35

Neither Geiger, Ogutsch nor Scheuermann deal with the hatzi kad-
dish after tahanun. It may be assumed that the appropriate nusah is
the same one applied to the hatzi kaddish before the barekhu since
the chant in major is used for tahanun and the concluding prayers of
the service. This hatzi kaddish also serves as a bridge to the Torah service
on Mondays and Thursdays because it closes with motifs 1 and 2 which
anticipate the minor mode of the nigun yadua for eyl erekh apayim.
Geiger refers to this nigun yadua while Ogutsch and Scheuermann
provide nearly identical renditions. (See Example 28.) The chant is in
natural minor and carries a supplicatory mood which reflects the text.
The nusah ends with motif 2, mirroring the nusah of the assumed hatzi
kaddish.

EXAMPLE 28

Wr. 20 D 1 ^ TM ^

Ogutsch

Scheuermann

'. Das Aus = und Einheben der Tora.
^ a) El erech apajim.

J^ Jl A

- rech a - pa - Jim w' rmv che - sed

J13J J>-

I * J. Ji Ji r

JiU JJ^J h

al p'- ap cho to-chi

l-so a-do-noi al a - me. cho w' ho-schi

, cho - to - nu 1' cho o-don a'lach-no k'rov racha-mc cho el.

The Torah service follows with the return of the nusah based on the
High Holy Day cantillation. (See Example 29.) Scheuermann's setting
opens with the mapakh pashta which is not overtly apparent in the
nusah for sh 'ma uvirkhoteha. Ogutsch begins his rendition with motif
9, a direct quote of the High Holy Day gershayim.61 (See Example 30.)
Ogutsch proceeds to motifs 7,8a and 5 while Scheuermann omits motif
7 en route to the same penultimate and cadential figures.

EXAMPLE 29

Nr. 21 3fl?J? T™.

Ogutsch

~ 1 f. -a p -T- T — — — . | Wit Ki mizijon ittaueh Bonidi
Jl J J N I I J I schenoaan.gad'ln Wimalemischa«
~ ^J ' ■*' T* ♦ loaenu twi Wktem hadVeklm «i
ml- ni acho - lo - jim. rezidintm.

EXAMPLE 30
Scheuermann

Baer's nusah for the seder hotzaat haTorah correlates with the High
Holy Day cantillation. (See Example 31.) He also instructs the con-
gregation to read the b 'rikh shmey silently. Geiger, however, informs
the reader that the b 'rikh shmey is not included in the service of Frank-
furt am Main since its origin is the Zohar and the rabbis of Frankfurt
do not accept its teachings. 82

EXAMPLE 31

]^n JJCJ3 \T1

37
Baer

7^=

_j*

-

^-^ ^^

'11 t ll 1:

w>

■e.cko
Char

r r ' U-r

i biuo » h...
mip.po-w.di.

-r» w.jj. J »«. n »_.dKk k«».

-t-

U mini) .jo. lc.» ...nli •

..-,-i*..H -.^*,

lo.jim.

4+

Bo .

«k •*..-

.«. ta.ifc I' «..m, jU. re .d lik.ta* . «L . ».

1 ™, ■,-,,

J".

Jtt:

:r..r..™

L*r«*t;t^^S

<1>4. U l .Uji ■

<*.J»m*

#?

8oio

ib-t.

■ 1 ^ * j ■

3 0...W.

For the reading of the Torah, Geiger records that the baal keriah
answers "amen" to the birkhot hatorah with the cantillation for re-
via.83 (Baer provides a similar setting in Baal Tefillah, page 29.) (See
Example 32.) For the hatzi kaddish after the keriah, Geiger calls for
nigun yadua. Ogutsch sets this hatzi kaddish in minor, a setting which
resembles his rendition before the barekhu for Shabbat.64 (See Exam-
ple 33.) Baer offers a setting in major, but he also writes that many
communities use the setting for Shabbat which is in minor.65

EXAMPLE 32

EXAMPLE 33

Ogutsch

Nr. 24 mitn b% E

' ' " " J - uy m X\ mmm

r' fis-kaddasch *tf-mS rab - bo $ $

V - oi - no dl irto <*

If EHp

I f " I' 1 t t r Ji ^

- dal w' jis- kaddasch acV-mj nb -
w' jam - lich mil - chu - web tfcha- jo- duuu u - Vjau- me-cnauii & - nkha-

1 r] | i, i n il '"'. ! ', ;, i/i,i

is jiu-ro - 81, b»- a- go la u- wis-man Ito-riw, w>- im- ra o - men.

j* ff-c

At this point in the service there are a series of yehi ratzon prayers
recited by the hazzan. Neither Geiger nor Ogutsch refers to these texts,
and yet, Scheuermann provides a setting written in the ahavah rabah.66
(See Example 34.) Baer offers two weises, a Polish version in ahavah
rabah and a German version in the cantillation for the high holy days.'"
(See Example 35.) It is hard to discern why Scheuermann would em-
ploy the eastern European approach when there is another choice which
is musically consistent with the nusah of Frankfurt am Main. Some
degree of understanding may come from a setting of these texts by
Maier-Kohn of Munich. His rendition begins exactly as Scheuermann's,
but his application of the ahavah rabah mode is ambiguous. The ca-
dence is not in minor of ahavah rabah. Instead, it is in major, anticipat-
ing the mode of hakhnasat haTowh.68 (See Example 36.)

EXAMPLE 34

ife

jim, 1' cho-nen es bes. .

o - vi nn ache - ba - scho - ma •
J J i h j — I Ebcnto dat game Otbet.

EXAMPLE 35

Baer

(Am M.atag ,.D«n,r.U 5 ) )1X1 TV ^Z™™!?.^'^™)'*

Ex;

mple 35

^

l^l|

*=*=*.

>' ^ ' I

I

^1

j=

, Ii h l> i ■ =;

•-"-

-, b t H -X ■

Hi

'-j_^ ' '

'UJ , 1 1

~^-+

EXAMPLE 36

The nusah for returning the Torah to the ark curiously recalls brit
milah motifs A and B; both Ogutsch and Baer use them for setting
yehalelu et shem hashem.69 (See Example 37.) For hashiveynu, Ogutsch
and Scheuermann employ a penultimate variant of motif 8a in prepa-
ration for a cadence with motif 7.70 The remaining passages of the
service, as it was mentioned earlier, are chanted in the way of hashi-
veynu. 71

EXAMPLE 37

Nr.25 ifep

^rfJJTi alalu u. HaschiTenn.

m

jijiu j' j' j'

J' ha - la - la es schcm a

U nis - gov self mo 1' tb -

Ha-schi Te-nn a-do-noi e - le-cbo V no-schu-voh, cha-desebjo-me - nu k' ke - dem.

The afternoon and evening services rely exclusively on the nusah of
the shaharit for their musical materials. Subsequently, since no new
nigunim are introduced, Geiger offers no suggestions about the nusah
for either minhah or arvit. Ogutsch and Scheuermann agree that the
nusah for the ashrey and the hatzi kaddish is a chant in major with
a cadence in the relative minor. Such is the case in shaharit where the
hatzi kaddish before the barekhu is in major and concludes with mo-
tifs 1 and 2. For the repetition of the amidah, the pentatonic is em-
ployed just as it is in the morning. For the tahanun and the concluding
texts of the service, the nusah follows the model of the shaharit.72

41

The evening service contains texts that do not appear in shaharit,
yet the an/it draws its nusah from the corresponding morning prayers.
Vehu rahum, which consists of preliminary verses that precede the offi-
cial call to worship, is set by Ogutsch (and Baer) with the pentatonic
of the birkhot hashahar. (See Example 38.) In the cadence, however,
Ogutsch closes diatonically in major, presumably for the sake of an-
ticipating the nusah of the barekhu. The barekhu itself is rendered in
the nusah of the morning and Ogutsch includes the variant for days
on which tahanun is not recited.73 (See Example 39.) Scheuermann mere-
ly writes that the core of the service should be chanted like shaharit
and he refrains from making any further musical notations.74

Nr.29 am Kirn

W„ K h i

EXAMPLE 38

Ogutsch

ji Tn .\

kol oh»- mo -

A-dau - boj hiu-ichl

Scheuermann

A-^o-noiho^chtohhtunft-ledija-i-nMiuwjomko-i^ou

EXAMPLE 39

Scheuermann

fi ' iimp

MS

jthti i,

42

Ogutsch continues with a setting of the nusah for the evening ver-
sion of the sh'ma uvirkhoteha. (See Example 40.) Again, the nusah
is the same five part chant based on the cantillation for the High Holy
Days. For the phrasemef veemunah, Ogutsch also adds the gershayim
(motif 9) which does not appear in the morning until the Torah serv-
ice. This transferring of motif 9 to the sh'ma uvirkhoteha further
demonstrates how this nusah is so intimately related to taamey hamikra.

Nr.31 Ofr^Jffifl

EXAMPLE 40

Ogutsch

Nr.31 — '+**" , -,,

ite

. wi loj" - loh u-m»w-dU

J i ;ttiJ\1j,Ji.v

m jaum u-iren lo-floh

. T . . T .

W

ji jy> J .

El duj V-b-jom t

Nr 33 H98

l. ":"r-

The addition of a second b 'rakhah (hashkiveynu) after the keriat
sh'ma attracts no attention from Ogutsch or Scheuermann. Only Baer
takes the trouble to notate the entire evening service even though his
Polische and Deutsche weises echo their respective nusah counterparts
from the shaharit. Baer does, however, include a third weise in his eve-
ning settings which is special for Tisha b'Av. Geiger mentions hash-
kiveynu while reminding the hazzan to begin chanting at uv'tzel
knafekha tastireynu, a point which both of the Frankfurt cantors over-
looks

43

Geiger also refers to the final text before the hatzi kaddish, the
b'rakhah nosefet, in instructing the hazzan to chant the entire last para-
graph.76 This portion, yiru eyneynu, seems to have a nigun yadua de-
spite the fact that Geiger does not identify it as such. This prayer
apparently had a particular allure for German cantors since not one
of the aforementioned sources neglects it. (See Example 41.) Ogutsch,
Scheuermann and Idelsohn render a nearly identical tune while Baer's
is quite similar to the others 77 The tune itself departs from the preceding
nusah of sh'ma uvirkhofeha and proceeds in major. It is interesting
to note that even the coloratura motif which appears in both Ogutsch' s
and Baer's renditions serves the same function; it is the antecedent to
the semi-cadence on the dominant below the tonic. It is also curious
that this motif strongly resembles the brit milah motif A.

EXAMPLE 41

Ogutsch

^

^ *£"■

- M - m ^ . ho- gel aif-M

JJ}J Jii^ "^jllJl JlJ

J ' J > J I J. I J > J >
!-Uu-ho . jleh A-diu-

=m*

• d»u - no) Jim lauch r - u -

lorn *o-ed. ki hiamutdiui MheU'du) 1" " "~ "-" "' "~ '— '

fin . I'me ul ttm - tut* V - eho -

m

^

]'- u lorn wo-td Val kol m.-i- now" 1

Scheuermann

Ji - ni o - dc - mi w'Jis mncb li - be - nu t' io-gcl naf-achc -no bi-schu o§ - ebo be-e- mes.bc « •
mor 1" »l-Jon mo-l«ch e - ]o- ho-Jtch,« -do- ooi me-lech,a-do- noi mo-locb a -do-

A \
Example 41

wm

iOJ'J »n ^m j\ jii^ **&m

i wo-ed, ki hu-mal-chusschel-rho bi n - 1' ol-rutu

tlm-loch b cho-vod ki ta lo- nu me-lcrb e - lo ot-tob,bo-rucho-toUa- do-uci

m

me-lechbich-vo-do to-mid jim-loch o-lc-nul' o-lom-»o-ed ■»•' al kol n

^ ""*

naf

she

. nu bi _ shu _ os . choh

be. e.

mes...

41 ki en

lo

T^T

me . lech • . loh o . toh,

bo .ruch

~^

toh a

do.

noTT

ha . me . lech bich vo . doh

=Hf

w

loch o . le . nu la . 6 . loin wo . ed we . al kol

Example 41

45
Baer

M k. . -r_r*.J-

™ , " 1 *t-J-^ l °

. ho.jufc ti._moj me.l.ti .Jo.«oj mo.loA (J..

T .i 1 I 1 * / J i' f

I ? r 1 P

1 F - ■ ■ I y ' 1 i 1

"*-*—'

S - £ -"

. gSEs* , ■ r^Oi. i r^n, , |

w» . «d

, J, J; Ji i i J. Ji J J J i 1 ■' i

' ' ~~^ ' ~ ' ~"" — ' "" — "

"■- , , ^^

, ■'■ 1 J

J. J >■ - J | , J==^^| „, ....

The hatz'l kaddish before the amidah is presumably chanted as it is
in minhah and in shaharit before the barekhu. This assumption is based
on Baer's instructions and the fact that the mode of the yiru eyneyynu
(major) matches the mode of this hatz'l kaddish.78 Ogutsch provides
an interesting variant for the end of the hatz'l kaddish. (See Example
42.) This alternate, which is to be sung on the eve of rosh hodesh,
replaces the ending of the nusah, motifs 1 and 2. Nonetheless, it still
concludes the setting in relative minor. The obvious purpose of this
variant is to remind the worshippers to add the yaaleh v'yavo in the
amidah.

EXAMPLE 42

Ogutsch

Nr. 34 Srhliifl de* Clf! vor JTD am n-w.

Since neither Ogutsch nor Scheuermann make any reference to the
concluding prayers of the evening service, it can be assumed that they
are chanted in the same nusah that is used for them in the morning
and afternoon services. (This assumption also concurs with Baer.)

Having completed the realizations of Geiger's nigunim yeduim, and
having thoroughly analyzed the origins and the components of the
nusah of Frankfurt am Main, it is worthwhile to examine the place
of this nusah within the entire Ashkenazy realm. In comparing the
weekday nusah of Western and Eastern European traditions, some strik-
ing differences and similarities arise. Disregarding that which is thought
to be Eastern European nusah transplanted to North America, it seems,
according to Baer, that the birhhot hashahar is to be chanted in pen-
tatonic regardless of a community's location." The p' sukey dezimra
also has a universal nusah which calls for chanting in a simple minor
mode. The only exceptions to this minor mode occur when there is
a celebration of a brit milah or when the nusah is highlighting the melo-
dy of shirat hayam, i.e. Ogutsch's first option.

The major discrepancies appear at theyishtabah, barekhu and sh'ma
uvirkhoteha. In the eastern European tradition, theahavah rahah mode
dominates the core of the service and it is introduced by the hazzan
for shaharit at yishtabah in anticipation of the barekhu and sh 'ma uvirk-
hoteha. The western European tradition is, of course, based on the High
Holy Day cantillation. The two traditions merge, however, for the repe-
tition of the amidah in a pentatonic mode. For the Seder hotzaat
haTorah, the Eastern European and Western European traditions re-
main unified, but in this case they share the nusah based on the High
Holy Day cantillation.

The identical discrepancy occurs in the evening service. The West-
ern European vehu rahum is sung in pentatonic while the barekhu and
sh'ma uvirkhoteha are chanted respectively in major and in the High
Holy Day cantillation. In contrast, the Eastern European nusah calls
for the ahavah rabah mode throughout the aforementioned prayers.

The ahavah rabah mode plays a role in each divergence of the two
traditions. Idelsohn demonstrates that this mode, unlike all of the

17

others, is not rooted in Biblical chant.80 There are various theories which
attempt to date the adoption of this mode by Jews in particular ge-
ographical regions, but all of the hypotheses agree that the ahavah rabah
mode was an accretion and that its origins in Jewish music do not date
back to the Geonic period, let alone the Second Temple period. 81

Subsequently, it is reasonable to assume that the Ashkenazim who
migrated from Western Europe to Eastern Europe incorporated the
ahavah rabah mode into the aforementioned sections of the tefillot.
Such an assumption leads one to conclude that the musical prototype
of the prayers in question is the nusah based on the High Holy Day
cantillation. This notion is further proven by the fact that a remnant
of the prototype still remains in the Eastern European nusah of the
Torah service.

In addition, the nusah of communities like Frankfurt am Main clearly
precedes that of any other Ashkenazy tradition. The rigidity and
zealousness with which Frankfurt am Main maintained its tradition
is important for establishing the continuity of the local minhag. The
pure form in which the prototype nusah appears in Ogutsch's and
Scheuermann's works affirms that the nusah of this city is directly
linked with ancient Biblical chant. The overall implication is that the
nusah of the entire Eastern and Western Ashkenazy tradition is based,
directly or indirectly, on the music of the Second Temple period.

GLOSSARY OF MOTIFS

4.I.JI I j , h .''■ J'^ 1 J—^WfaU^

n -m' - to - ra-chira o - m* schab'chimj
n . m* lo - a-rim o-ma • ri - iton »

n-mak - di - schim

Glossary of Motifs (continued)

n^i-n n-i:i

FOOTNOTES

1A.Z. Idelsohn, Thesaurus of Oriental Hebrew Melodies, Vol. II, (Ktav Publishing
House, 1973), pp. 7-8.

2Eugen Mayer, "The Jews of Frankfurt, Glimpses of the Past:' In Commet,

of 'the Frankfurt Jewish • i m (Jeiusalem Hadassah Apprentice School of

Printing, 1965) pp. 18-19.

4Cecil Roth, "The Frankfurt Memorbuch'" In Commemoi n of the Fmnkfurt Jewish

> (i I ii [I ii llidassah Apprentice School of Printing, 1965), p. 11.

5Mayer, In Commemomtion of the Frankfurt Jewish Community, p, 28.

6Zvi Y. Leitner, Minhagei Frankfurt, (Jerusalem: 1982), p. 13

7Eugen Mayer, op. cit., p. 32.

8Zvi Y. Leitner, op. cit., p. 8.

9Eugen Mayer, op. cit., p. 46.

10 Paul Arnsberg, Die Geschichte der Frankfurter Juden seit der Fmntosichen Revo-
lution, Vol. III. (Darmstadt: E. Roether Verlag, 1983) p. 144.

12 Fabian Ogutsch, Der Frankfurter Kantor, (Frankfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann Ver-
lag, 1930), p. 3. (vorwort) [henceforth Ogutsch],

13A.Z. Idelsohn. Jewish Musk, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1929).
pp. 177-178.

14 Ogutsch, p. 3.

15AZ Idelsohn, Thesaurus of Oriental Hebrew Melodies, Vol. VII, p. v.

"Ibid., p. vi.

17 Salomon Michael Geiger, Divrey Kehilot, (Fmnkfurt am Main: Verlag von J. Kauff-
mann, 1862), p. 13 [henceforth Geiger].

"According to Max Wohlberg, professor of nusah at the Jewish Theological Semi-
nary, the German/Wi tern ) iropean cantors showed a tendancy to "tonicize" their
pentatonic chant, ending with scale steps 3-2-1, while the central Europeans would
cadence with scale steps 4-3 (see Abraham Baer's Baal Tefilah, p. 1. no. 4). The East-
ern Europeans were more likely to close with the lower of the two aforementioned
chant-tones of the pentatonic mode. (From a private session with Wohlberg on Oc-
tober 29, 1987.)

52

Footnotes (continued)

19 Paul Arnsberg, op. cit., Vol. Ill, pp. 328 and 464.

20Ogutsch,p. 15.

21 Ibid., p. 102. Also note that the same Hanukkah tradition is mentioned in a foot-
note of Abraham Baer's Baal Tefillah, p. 1.

22Geiger,p. 17.

23 Ibid., p. 23.

240gutsch,p. 6.

25ShmuelKrauss, Korot Bet Hatefillah V Yisrael, (New York: Shulsinger Bros. Linotyp-
ing and Publishing. 1955), p. 326.

Krauss mentions this custom as a takanah which was adopted by many congrega-
tions in order to curb excess conversation during prayer services. He also records on
page 318 the tradition of reciting a special mi sheberakh for those who are quiet dur-
ing t'filbt.

26SabrroiGeiger, Divrey Kehilot, p, 24.

27 Ibid.

28 Selig Scheuermann, Die gottesdienstlichen Gesange der Israeliten, (Frankfurt am
Main: J. Kauffmann Verlag, 1912). p. 78 [henceforth Scheuermannl.

29Abraham Baer£aal Tefilah, (Leipsig: 1877), pp. 4-6 [henceforth Baer].

30 Scheuermann, p. 86.

3\biDivrey Kehilot, p. 26, Geiger proscribes that the hazzan should read the shimt
hayam silently with the congregation, but the hazzan should chant Adonai ish milha-
ma, etc., yeminkha, etc., mikhamokha, etc., ad yaavor, and Adonai yimlokh. These
are the same verses which are chanted with the shirah melody when the shimt hayam
is read from the sefer Torah.

32AZIdelsohn. Jewish Music, pp. 42 and 49.

33 Baer, pp. 4-5.
34Ibid., p. 7.
35 Geiger,p. 29.
36Md
37Baer,p. 8.
380gutsch, p. 10.

Footnotes (continued)

38 Ibid, p. 14.

40 Geiger, p. 30.

410gutsch,p. 10. (no. 13).

Selig Scheuermann, p. 79, (no. 5).

42 Scheuermann, p. 87.

43 Ibid, p. 86.

44 AZ Idelsohn, Jewish Music, p, 58.

45 0gutsch, p. 69.
"Ibid., pp. 56-58.

47 AZ Idelsohn, Thesaurus of Oriental Hebrew Melodies, Vol. II, p. 15.
48 AZ Idelsohn, Jewish Music, pp. 57-58.

49 A.Z. Idelsohn, Thesaurus of Oriental Hebrew Melodies, Vol. II, pp. 7-9.

50 AZ Idelsohn, Jewish Music, p. 59.

51 Geiger, p. 31.
52Baer. pp. 11-12.

53 Geiger, p. 32.

54 Ogutsch, p. 10.

55 Baer, p. 14.

56 Ogutsch, p. 12.

57 Ibid., p. 17.

P. Klibansky, Kol Yeshurim, (Frankfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann Verlag, 1894), p
1-2.
Scheuermann, p. 3.

"Geiger, p. 36.

59 Ogutsch, p. 13.

60 Scheuermann, p. 81.

61 Scheuermann, p. 87.

54

Footnotes (continued)

62 Geiger, p. 60.

63 Geiger, p. 47.
"Ogutsch, pp. 13 and 25.

65Baer, p. 43. (music notation on p. 27)
'Scheuermann, p. 81.
67Baer,p. 44.

68 A.Z. Idelsohn, Thesaurus of Oriental Hebrew Melodies, Vol. VII, p. 7.

69 Ogutsch, p. 23.
Baer, p. 45.

70 Scheuermann, p. 81.
"Ibid.

72 Ogutsch, p. 14.
Scheuermann, p. 8 1 .

73 Ogutsch, p. 14.
"Scheuermann, p. 81.

75 Geiger, p. 37.
"Ibid.

77 Ogutsch, p. 15.
Scheuermann, p. 82.

A.Z. Idelsohn, Thesaurus of Oriental Hebrew Melodies, Vol. VII, p. 9.
Baer, p. SO.

78 Baer, p. 50.
"Ibid.

80AZ Idelsohn, Jewish Music, pp. 87-88.
"Ibid.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arnsberg, Paul, Die Geschichte der Frankfurter Juden seit der Fran-
zosichen Revolution, Vol. Ill, Darmstadt: E. Roether Verlag, 1983.

Baer, Abraham, Baal Tefilah, Leipzig: 1877.

Geiger, Salomon Michael, Divrey Kehilot, Frankfurt am Main: Verlag
von J. Kaufmann, 1862.

Idelsohn, A.Z., Jewish Music, New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston,
Inc., 1929.

Idelsohn, A.Z., Thesaurus of Oriental Hebrew Melodies, Vols. II and
VII, Ktav Publishing House, 1973.

Klibansky, P., Kol Yeshurun, Frankfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann Ver-
lag, 1894.

Krauss, Shmuel, Korot Batey Hatefillah be Yisraei, New York: Shul-
singer Bros. Linotyping and Publishing, 1955.

Leitner, Zvi Y., Minhagei Frankfurt, lerusalem: 1982.

Mayer, Eugen, "The Jews of Frankfurt, Glimpses of the Past: ' In Com-
memoration of the Frankfurt Jewish Community, Jerusalem: Hadas-
sah Apprentice School of Printing, 1965.

Ogutsch, Fabian, Der Frankfurter Kantor, Fmnkfurt am Main: J. Kauff-
mann Verlag, 1930.

Roth, Cecil, "The Frankfurt Memorbuch," In Commemoration of the
Fmnkfurt Jewish Community, Jerusalem: Hadassah Apprentice School
of Printing, 1965.

Scheuermann, Selig, Die gottesdienstlichen Gesange der Israeliten,
Fmnkfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann, 1912.

56

A GUIDE TO MUSIC RESOURCES IN ISRAEL

YOSEF (JEFFREY) ZUCKER

As an American-trained hazzan living in Israel, I am naturally in-
terested in locating sources for music in general and Jewish music in
particular. In addition, colleagues visiting from abroad often ask me
where they might go in order to purchase materials to bring home. I
present the following " Guide to Music Resources in Israel" as an out-
growth of my own inquiries, in the hope that it might answer the needs
of colleagues visiting from abroad.

What follows is a listing of major publishing houses, research or-
ganizations, periodicals, and libraries in Israel. Little has been inten-
tionally omitted, except for music stores, which were not listed in order
to avoid appearing in favor of one over another. There are a number
of small publishing houses which I did not list, but their publications
may be located in stores along with those of the major publishers. The
visitor should also consult the newspapers for the programs of Israel's
radio stations and announcements of concerts and festivals all over
the country.

Because of the difficulty of defining the boundaries between them,
I have made no attempt to distinguish between Jewish and Israeli music,
or between Israeli and other contemporary music, I have simply provid-
ed the broadest possible listing, and left it to the individual to narrow
down the field to a particular interest. Usually, one find leads to another.

In order to help the visitor locate them, I have listed those publish-
ers whose work is directed towards the Israeli consumer in Hebrew
as well as English. The remaining publishers issue works in Hebrew
and English. In addition, I have indicated in my notes those periodi-
cals which are entirely in Hebrew. One can take as a matter of pride
the current existence of two magazines on music in Hebrew published
solely for an Israeli readership. They should live and be well! The jour-
nals published for the broader academic world are issued in a combi-
nation of Hebrew, English, and various other Western languages. The
visitor to any of the libraries will find himself at home with the high
percentage of books in English as well as any other language he might
read.

HAZZAN YOSEF (JEFFREY) ZUCKER. a graduate of the Cantors Institute of the
Jewish Theological Seminary, is a founding member of Kibbutz Hannaton in Israel,
where he remains active as a teacher and composer.

GLOSSARY OF MOTIFS

jj ji i ) j e J* g i J ji-j-a^

ii -m' - to - ra-chira n - m' schab'chimj
n-m' to • r-rim a-ma rri -limi

n.mak - di - •chim

Glossary of Motifs (continued)

n'n-'O ru A

n^fo n'la

nn-mau hab-b'ris,