who asked the first question? - International Research Center For ...

271specific double flute made from clay. Both tubes are ostensibly the same length, and bothhave the same number identical holes. Although this description point to the monophonictype of double instrument, this double flute has a very interesting (in fact, unique)distinction from monophonic instruments. These two tubes do not have the identicalshapes. Out of two tubes one is straight, and the shape of another one has a small curve,“twist”. So although the absolute length of both tubes is the same (from the mouthpieceto the end of the tube), the length of the vibrating air column is bigger in the “twisted”tube (Marti, 1971:72). Therefore, if we try to play on this instrument, coveringsimultaneously the same holes on both tubes, we will get the constant sounding dissonantinterval (roughly the major seconds).Of course, the suggestion that Ancient Mesoamericans were playing in parallelseconds is very hypothetical, as there are plenty of different ways of playing this kind ofdouble flute “with a twist”, not only by covering the same holes of both tubessimultaneously. And still, the idea of playing in parallel seconds must be taken intoconsideration seriously. Let me say few words to support this supposition:• Double blown instruments with the similar length tubes and identical holes (Iam talking about the unison double instruments from other regions) are mostly played inunison, with player covering the same holes simultaneously. With the identical holes onboth tubes on Mesoamerican double instruments it seems natural that player would cover(at least sometimes) same holes on both tubes, creating parallel seconds. Otherwise, if theinstrument was constantly played with the hands of both fingers constantly usingdifferent (non-secondal) sound combinations, then what was the purpose of making of adouble instrument with such an inventive shape?• In a “Case Study” of American native musical cultures, following thesuggestions of archaeologists, physical anthropologists and molecular biologists, Iproposed that the surviving elements of vocal polyphony among American Indians mightbe connected to the carriers of European singing traditions, as European were supposedlyamong the first human groups who reached the American continent. Drone type ofpolyph ony and secondal dissonances are basic characteristic features of European typevocal polyphony. Drone character of polyphony is quite obvious from the Mesoamericanmultitubed flutes and surviving elements of vocal polyphony of Native Americans fromdifferent regions of America. Double flute “with a twist” gives an indication thatdissonant seconds could as well be part of the polyphony of the Ancient Mesoamericanpeoples.Of course, none of these considerations and facts gives the definitive support tothe preposition that Ancient Mesoamericans were familiar to the vocal forms ofpolyphony with the drone and secondal dissonances. At the same time it seems to me thattogether they give quite a substantial combined support to this idea. And of course, if weremember the central idea of this book, that vocal polyphony is not a late phenomenonthat evolved from the initial monophony, and that the traditions of vocal polyphonyshow the overall historical tendency of decline and disappearance in all major regionsof the world (including North and South Americas), the presence of vocal andinstrumental forms of polyphony among Ancient Mesoamerican cultures seems verynatural.