A Few Points on Mousa Maroufi’s Radif and Faramarz Payvar’s Transcription

As we know, Mousa Maroufi’s radif is his attempt to compile a comprehensive collection (albeit with the usual ambiguities that such overarching endeavors bring). Until now, it has remained unclear exactly which sources informed the published version of this compilation. Some of this ambiguity came to light with the publication of Mousa Maroufi’s letter of complaint in the press, shedding light on the details of the process. Yet the most significant clarity emerged when Payvar Foundation accessed the Faramarz Payvar’s “separated version“ of the radif. Thanks to this particular transcription, it is now possible to precisely map each gusheh (melodic fragment) to each source, radif.

However, the precise manner in which Payvar accessed these details is still uncertain, though we know he studied Iranian music under Maroufi for a time. From existing narratives and records of Iranian music, it seems Maroufi was generous with his knowledge, sharing it with serious students recommended by music masters. We also know that Saba encouraged his students to engage in this task, which will become evident later through Lotfollah Mokhampayan’s narrative.

Another key unknown in this radif finds its answer in Lotfollah Mokhampayan’s transcription of Mousa Maroufi’s radif; with his efforts, we now have access to three distinct versions of Mousa Khan’s work.

Lotfollah Mokhampayan’s Transcription of Maroufi’s Radif

Turning to a passage in Mokhampayan’s introduction to The Dastgahs of Traditional Iranian Music reveals an important point:

“To address this challenge and gain greater confidence, the master asked me to seek out the most senior music teachers of the time, and, to the extent possible, copy their radifs—so that by comparing different versions of a single gusheh, we could select, arrange, and publish the most authentic and rooted one.

With the guidance of Master Saba, I gradually became acquainted with the most respected music masters of the era—Shahnazi (Ali Akbar), Mahjoubi (Morteza), Maroufi (Mousa), Mansouri (Ebrahim), and Yahaghi (Hossein)—each possessing their own style and radif and at least a partial familiarity with Western notation. Over days and months of discussions and clarifications, I requested their radifs, promising that, once arranged and edited, their radifs would be published under their names. Unfortunately, not only did my proposal seem unfeasible to them, but none agreed to assist in this endeavor. Their resistance stemmed from various reasons. The most significant reason was their unfamiliarity with music notation. The absence of well-ordered, polished radifs that could garner the approval of other masters was the other primary reason. Some deemed the task impossible, while others questioned the need to endure such hardship for the sake of a handful of musicians.

Only one responded positively to my request: the master, the noble and gifted Mousa Maroufi, who had an excellent command of both reading and writing music notation, who, through his tireless efforts, had carefully and beautifully transcribed the radifs of Agha Mirza Abdollah, Agha Hossein Gholi, and Darvish Khan—passed from one to the next—into multiple booklets.”

Fortunately, through the vision of Dr. Barkeshli, Mokhampayan’s invaluable work was published in the author’s handwritten form, free from editorial revisions.

What we see in Mokhampayan’s manuscript is a radif interwoven with poetry—concise, yet containing gushehs rarely seen in established radifs over the past sixty years.

Montazem ol-Hokama’s Radif in Mousa Maroufi’s hands

Following Mokhampayan’s transcription in 1939, Mousa Maroufi turned his attention to the radif of Montazem ol-Hokama (Mehdi Solhi) as documented by Mahdiqoli Hedayat. Hedayat had donated his notation of Montazem ol-Hokama’s preserved radif to the Music Conservatory. Maroufi became familiar with this text and analyzed it, and though he recognized its importance, he found it inadequately written. His enthusiasm for rewriting it (for personal use, perhaps) may explain why, in his radif—known as the Mousa Maroufi radif—he ended up drawing more directly from Montazem ol-Hokama’s version than initially expected.

It should also be noted that Maroufi’s endorsement of Montazem ol-Hokama’s radif—given his mastery of Mirza Abdollah’s and Mirza Hossein Gholi’s radifs—confirms the reliability of Hedayat’s work. In any case, Maroufi found significant material in this radif and chose to integrate it into his compilation.

Publication of the Mousa Maroufi’s Radif: A Review of His Open Letter

A glance at the published version of this compilation reveals no mention of its compiler. Even in the remarks of Mohammad Baharloo, who assisted Maroufi during the final compilation, we hear of the hardships and heartbreaks caused by being sidelined and the extensive changes introduced in the publication process. These feelings led Maroufi to write an open letter to the press:

“[…] Now that the complete course of Iranian music has been published, with such a book in hand, we can claim that we too have music—since all the vocal pieces are written out, providing a foundation and roots for Iranian music. I must also note that this book is intended for Iranians, not foreigners—because the special symbols used in Iranian music do not exist in European music. Should we wish to notate Iranian music for foreigners, it would have to be written differently. For example, vocal music (Aavaz), written without rhythm, is unique to Iran; to preserve its natural character, it must be written without rhythm unless it naturally includes rhythm, like Kershmeh or Zanguleh. Thus, including large amounts of French text in this book was unnecessary and a waste of time. On the one hand, most Iranians do not know French; on the other hand, foreigners cannot use this book. So why delay publication for such an unessential task? Musicians and students urgently need books like this.

[…] Moreover, it would have been proper for the officials of the Fine Arts Administration to acknowledge and commend those who contributed to this book—collectors, fair copyists, and transcribers—so that others might also gladly take on such labor. Without appreciation, discouragement naturally follows—indifference towards the servants of the art is indifference towards the art itself. Of course, this appreciation should have been recorded in the book itself to inspire confidence.

It should also be said that before the study of the late Hedayat’s radif, when Mr. Ali Asghar Hekmat was Minister of Culture, the Publications Office had been asked to fund the printing of this book for my benefit; in a letter dated 1938/07/08 No. 5541, they wrote that the Supreme Council of Culture had approved the printing. But alas, Mr. Hekmat resigned, and Mr. Mer’at was appointed in his place. I thought they might send the sole manuscript to the National Music Office for review; since there was no favorable opinion towards Iranian music then, I feared the manuscript might be lost. So, I retrieved it from the Publications Office and abandoned the matter. Later, when a committee from the Fine Arts Administration was formed to consider the printing, a friend told me that the Iran-America Cultural Association was willing to publish the book under my supervision, taking two hundred copies for themselves and leaving the rest for me to sell at my benefit. But at that time, seeing that the Fine Arts Administration wished to do the work themselves, I declined. Even the university offered to print it, and again I refused—never imagining that my efforts would be so disregarded that they would mention only “compiled by Mousa Maroufi” in the book, with no mention of my brief biography and record of service, which I had sent for inclusion, would be omitted. Why? For what reason? I do not know—do you? My sole purpose has always been to serve my compatriots and our national music. I love my homeland—what have I to do with faith or disbelief? My only wish is to serve, and may God grant me the strength to do so.”

—Mousa Maroufi, December 1, 1963

Maroufi rewrote this radif in two stages by his own account, up until 1318 (1939/40): first using his knowledge of the radif of Darvish Khan and then using Vaziri’s notation from the Mirzas. The third phase of this excellent work involved integrating the radif of Montazem al-Hokama with his compilations, which apparently brought it closer to the form now available to everyone.

Payvar’s Copy of Mousa Maroufi’s Radif

Payvar transcribed this copy into six hand-made notebooks (Beyazi) measuring 27 x 18 cm, written in pencil. On the first page of the first notebook, it says:

• ع: from the radif of Mirza Abdollah (میرزا عبدالله)

• ح: from the radif of Aqa Hossein-Qoli (آقا حسین قلی)

• د: from the radif of Darvish Khan (درویش خان)

• م: from the radif of Montazem al-Hokama (منتظم الحکما)

A complete collection of Persian classical music radif compiled by Mr. Mousa Maroufi, one of the old masters of Persian classical music, written in 6 notebooks:

First Notebook
Avaz-e Esfahan, Rast-Panjgah, Nava

Second Notebook
Remaining Nava, Segah, Homayoun

Third Notebook
Chahargah, Avaz-e Afshari, Avaz-e Turk

Fourth Notebook
Dastan-e Arab, Dashti, Shur

Fifth Notebook
Remaining Shur, Bayat-e Kord, Mahur

Sixth Notebook
Remaining Mahur

About these notebooks, we know the following:

• There is no date of transcription.
• He wrote these abbreviations (letters) at the start of each gusheh (melodic phrase), but in some gushehs, this identifier is missing or falls outside these signs; in some cases, other people’s names are mentioned: Sagharizadeh, Haji, Ghahramani, and so on.
• Although the exciting part of this transcription is the gusheh-by-gusheh identification of the sources of this compilation, perhaps the most crucial part of this document is the reference and clear attribution of some parts to Darvish Khan.
• This radif shows undeniable similarity to the printed version and clarifies a few points:

1. 1. The printed version was Maroufi’s final revision.
   2. This clarifying attribution layer was removed in the final printed version.
   3. Most likely, Payvar got help from Maroufi in recording the names.

• Since Maroufi himself stated that the notation of Montazem al-Hokama’s radif, as transcribed by Heydat/Hedayat, contained errors that he corrected—and since we now have Hedayat’s notation fully available, and we know which gushehs are taken from his writings—Maroufi’s method of rewriting that radif is fully researchable and reconstructible.
• In one gusheh, an interesting note appears: “From the radif of Hangafarin, which is the same as Montazem al-Hokama’s radif.“
• This entry clarifies the proportions:
  • 43.7% from Montazem al-Hokama
  • 17% from Darvish Khan
  • 13% from Mirza Hossein-Qoli
  • 1.08% from Mirza Abdollah
  • 15.9% unspecified
  • 2.5% from the ancients
  • Two gushehs from Ghahramani
  • One gusheh from Navaei
  • One gusheh from Sagharizadeh
  • One gusheh from Hangafarin
• Two more of Payvar’s notebooks are dedicated to Mousa Maroufi. One contains some of his compositions, and the other is the radif of Mahur, on the cover of which is written: “arranged in a particular style by Mousa Maroufi.”

Payvar Foundation Targeting in Regards to Faramarz Payvar’s Transcription of Mousa Maroufi’s Radif

As we advance, with these three documents, our work is defined as follows:

• Transcribe Payvar’s handwritten copy without any alterations.
• Transcribe Lotfollah Mofakham Payan’s handwritten copy without any alterations.
• Transcribe the two other notebooks that Payvar wrote in the margins of his complete transcription of Maroufi’s radif without any alterations.
• Conduct a comparative study of what is called Mirza Hossein-Qoli’s radif in this compilation, comparing it to audio recordings and written sources such as:
• Mirza Hossein-Qoli’s radif, as written by Farhad Arzhangi and Faramarz Payvar
• The performance by Ali Akbar Shahnazi
• The notations by Vahdani and Pirniakan
• Conduct a comparative and methodological study of Mousa Maroufi’s rewriting of Montazem al-Hokama’s radif compared to Mokhber al-Saltaneh Hedayat’s notation.
• Separate the compilations and line up the statements of each narrator to identify each radif master’s style and technique.
• Analyze Mousa Maroufi’s selection and curation methodology to uncover his choice logic.
• Publish the original documents alongside these comparative studies.