Susanne Ziegler

106SUSANNEOZIEGLERSIEGFRIED F. NADEL AND HIS CONTRIBUTION TOGEORGIAN POLYPHONY*IntroductionSiegfried Frederic Nadel, in other sources Siegfried Ferdinand (Salat, 1983:23), isgenerally renowned as an anthropologist. Yet, less known is that he also studied alsomusicology and published in musicology as well as in ethnomusicology. Among hisnumerous publications is the book “Georgische Gesänge”, published in 1933, whichwill be the focus of my paper.My first encounter with Nadel’s book “Georgische Gesänge” was at a seminar onFolk Music of the people of the USSR, which I held at the Institut für VergleichendeMusikwissenschaft of the Free University in Berlin in 1985. At the conference “Voprosynarodnogo mnogogolosija” (Questions of Folk Polyphony), held in Borjomi (Georgia,former Soviet Union) October 15-22, 1988, I presented a paper tracing the history ofGeorgian polyphony in German musicological literature (Ziegler, 1989). I was surprisedto learn that Nadel’s book, which can be regarded as one of the earliest andmost comprehensive studies of Georgian polyphony in German, was not cited inMarius Schneider’s substantial study “Geschichte der Mehrstimmigkeit” (Schneider,1934). As I pointed out later (Ziegler, 1992), there were probably political reasons forthis omission, but even in the second edition of the book (Schneider, 1969) Nadel ismentioned only marginally.During my work with the wax cylinder collections of the Berlin Phonogramm-Archiv I gained more insight into Nadel’s activities at that time. The Berlin Phonogramm-Archiv holds a wax cylinder collection recorded by Nadel in Nigeria among the Nupein 1935 (cf. Ziegler, 2006), and correspondence with Nadel is also preserved.The following paper is not intended to present a complete overview on Nadel’s lifeand work (for this see Salat, 1983), but rather to fill a gap and find out more aboutNadel’s time in Berlin in the beginning of the 1930s, when he was working on Georgianpolyphony. Historical sources from that time are rare, and only few sourceshave been found as yet. Hence, the emphasis here is on the Phonogramm-Archive’sholdings including correspondence, Nadel’s publications and other materials kept inBerlin.Short Biography 1Siegfried Ferdinand Nadel 2 was born 1903 in Lemberg, Galicia (at that time Austria,today Lwów in the Ukraine). In 1912 the family moved to Vienna, where in 1921he finished school and started with the study of musicology, art history and psychol-

107ogy at Vienna University. Among his teachers were Guido Adler, Robert Lach, JosefStrzygowski and Karl Bühler. Nadel also took piano lessons and wanted to become aconductor and composer. He finished his studies in 1925 with the dissertation “ZurPsychologie des Konsonanzerlebens” (On the Psychology of Consonantal Experience).For a short time Nadel worked as a temporary assistant conductor at theDüsseldorf Opera and travelled to Czechoslovakia and England. He earned money bygiving lessons, writing programs for broadcasting stations, publishing papers on varioussubjects and working in the Phonogrammarchiv and the Ethnographical Museum inVienna. In December 1930 Nadel submitted his probationary treatise for admission asacademic lecturer (“Habilitation”) to the philosophical faculty of Vienna University,entitled “Der duale Sinn der Musik – eine musikalische Typologie”, in order to attainthe venia legendi for “Comparative Musical Theory”, “Psychology of Music” and“Aesthetics of Music”. However, the members of the committee – psychologists andmusical theorists – did not approve unanimously and Nadel withdraw his application.Together with his wife he moved to Berlin, where he finished several publications,among them a biography on Ferruccio Busoni and the aforementioned book on Georgiansongs. In Berlin he came into contact with Curt Sachs, Erich M. von Hornbosteland Diedrich Westermann; this probably stimulated him to study African languagesand to apply for a grant in order to study in England at the London School of Economics.In 1932 he started the study of anthropology and finished in 1935 with adissertation on “Political and Religious Structure of Nupe Society” (Nadel 1942),where he had been on fieldwork for one year. A second field trip to Nigeria followedat the end of 1935. In 1938 he was appointed “Government Anthropologist” in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. His book “A Black Byzantium” of 1939 (Nadel, 1946) was a résuméof his fieldwork among the Nuba people. During World War 2 he served in the BritishMilitary Administration, mainly in Africa, where he put his experience as anthropologistinto practice. After the war he continued to teach at different academic institutionsin England and was finally appointed professor for anthropology at the ‘AustralianNational University’ in Canberra, Australia, where he died unexpectedly in January1956.Nadel and MusicologyIt is quiet likely that Nadel enjoyed a close relationship with music. He alreadytook piano lessons in 1920 and studied musicology with Robert Lach and GuidoAdler, two famous representatives of the Vienna school of musicology. Today GuidoAdler is regarded as one of the fathers of ethnomusicology, as he introduced thesubject “musicology” in his university courses as early as 1885. Robert Lach is knownforemost for his recording activities among prisoners of war in Austrian prison camps.Among the university courses that Nadel attended, it is mentioned that he was introducedto several practical courses by Lach and Adler in the institute of musicology(Salat, 1983:138 ff.). So one may assume that Nadel became familiar with the recordingsmade in Austrian prison camps and probably also with the Caucasian recordings,which were published later by Lach in two volumes in 1928 and 1930.By reviewing the title of his early publications, one can easily observe that Nadel’s

Ziegfried E. Nadel and his Contributionto Georgian Polyphony109In addition, the customs authorities were asked not to cause any problems, since thematerial was intended to be used for scientific purposes only (letter in German andFrench). In the list of phonographs on loan there is also an entry about a phonograph“Excelsior”, given to Dr. Nadel on April 18, 1932. The machine - belonging to thePhonogramm-Archiv - was not returned, but was later given by Nadel to SuperintendentMurray in Nigeria.It still remains unclear as to whether Nadel really had the intention of travelling tothe Caucasus and make music recordings. In other sources (Salat, 1983:26) it ismentioned that at about the same time he asked for a Rockefeller fellowship in orderto study at the London School of Economics. It may well be that Nadel followeddifferent plans at that time; the Caucasian plan was not realsed, but the phonographwas already in Nadel’s hands, and he obviously took it to Nigeria at the end of 1933.The correspondence preserved in the Phonogramm-Archiv does not include anycorrespondence between Nadel and Hornbostel, but several documents reveal a livelycorrespondence between Nadel and Schneider in preparing Nadel’s expedition to Nigeria.In May 1933 (letter of May 17, 1933) Nadel – at that time already in London -asked for recorders for his phonograph. From the letter it becomes clear that he wasalso in contact with Hornbostel, Kolinski and Sachs and well informed about thesituation in Berlin, since he addresses Schneider as the only “surviving” person in thePhonogramm-Archiv. Nadel meanwhile bought his own phonograph which – accordingto him – seemed better apt for language recordings, and the phonographbelonging to the Berlin Phonogramm-Archiv was given to another scholar in Nigeria(letter Lisbeth Nadel of December 1933). From the correspondence it becomes alsoevident that Nadel had cylinder copies from earlier collections of African music in hispossession, for example, cylinders recorded by Ankermann, Waldow and Struck 5 . InMarch 1935 Nadel reported that he made several recordings on wax cylinders andasked for copies, which he urgently needed for his lectures. Wax cylinder recordingsno. 1 – 57, together with documentation, were sent to Berlin in June 1935, but Nadelwas not satisfied with the quality of the copies and complained. In December 1935Nadel and his wife set off for the second periodfield research in Nigeria; the waxcylinders resulting from the second trip were – deliberately or not – given to theVienna Phonogrammarchiv. When Schneider heard about this arrangement in 1938,he complained in Vienna, but secretly exchanged copies with his colleague Leo Hajek.Nadel, meanwhile working as British government anthropologist in Sudan, had beeninformed by Hajek and wrote an indignant letter to Schneider (May 7, 1938) trying toclarify and asking him for an official excuse.‘There is only one more letter from Nadel, dated August 24, 1955, from Canberraasking Kurt Reinhard, director of the Phonogramm-Archiv since 1952, for copies ofhis wax cylinders from Nigeria. Reinhard reported about the present desolate state ofthe Phonogramm-Archiv and submitted an offer for transferring Nadel’s cylinders,but due to Nadel’s untimely death the arrangement was not continued.

110 Susanne ZieglerNadel and Georgian MusicThere is no information about the reasons for Nadel’s study of Georgian songs. Inthe preface to his publication Nadel mentions that the collection was part of therecordings made in German prison camps during World War 1 under the direction ofC. Stumpf and G. Schünemann. Nadel’s study is exclusively based on the records,and he gives also the records’ inventory numbers (P.K.), but he does not mention thewax cylinders that were recorded at the same time and housed in the Phonogramm-Archiv 6 . The record collection, however, was not part of the Phonogramm-Archiv,but of the Lautarchiv, at that time called Lautabteilung in the Prussian State Library.The director of the Lautabteilung from 1920 up to 1931 was Wilhelm Doegen, amanager who was more interested in language than in music. In addition, Doegen didnot maintain any contact with the Phonogramm-Archiv, but instead, he ignored it. Onthe other hand, we know that Nadel was in contact with Hornbostel and Sachs, butthey probably had no access to the holdings of the Lautarchiv and are not mentionedin Nadel’s introduction. So it remains an open question as to who the person waswho introduced Nadel to the collections of the Lautarchiv and how he gained accessto the Georgian records.Historical documents preserved today in the archive of Humboldt-university aremerely concerned with the search for a specialist in the Georgian language ratherthan in music. When Adolf Dirr, who was involved in the recordings of prisoners ofwar both in Austria and in Germany, died in early 1930s, Doegen asked Prof. Meckelein(in a letter of February 23, 1932) to prepare the Georgian songs for print. We maysuppose that by this time the transcriptions were already completed. Meckelein, however,responded negatively and recommended David Ghambashidse, a Georgian nativespeaker. Nadel came into contact with Ghambashidse, and he is the only personto whom Nadel expresses his thanks (Nadel, 1933:5). At about the same time (June2-3, 1933) David Ghambashidse was recorded at the Lautarchiv with examples ofthe spoken Georgian language 7 .The document about the loan of a phonograph for field recordings in Georgiadates from August 1 st , 1932, when at least the music transcriptions had been finished.It could well be that Nadel – probably together with Ghambashisde – was planning afield trip to Georgia. However, instead of going to Georgia he went to England, andthe publication of his manuscript proceeded in Germany without the author.The manuscript on Georgian songs – surprisingly without any translations of theGeorgian song texts – was sent to different publishers in summer 1933, in order toget the lowest offer on costs. Meanwhile Doegen was no longer director of theLautabteilung, but replaced by Diedrich Westermann 8 . The manuscript, including 35pages musical notes, was finally printed by C. Schulze & Co., Gräfenhainichen (Germany)and published in commission by Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, Leipzig. Accordingto the correspondence in the Lautarchiv, the musical notes were printed separately bythe music publisher Balan, and later bound together with the text. The publicationwas printed in an edition of 500 copies.

Ziegfried E. Nadel and his Contributionto Georgian Polyphony111Nadel’s publication is the first comprehensive study of Georgian songs in a Westernlanguage. It is divided into eight chapters: I. Einleitung (Introduction). II. Landund Sänger (Country and singers). III. Gesangstechnik und Stimmführung (Singingtechnique and vocal direction). IV. Text. V. Melos. VI. Tonsystem (Tonal system).VII. Mehrstimmigkeit (Polyphony) VIII. Kulturbeziehungen (Cultural relations). Remarksabout the transcriptions and two tables (Initial phrases and musical scales) areadded. The book provides a general overview about Georgian songs, their history,cultural embeddment, regional forms and possible origin. Polyphony is always seenin relation to Western mediaeval polyphony, and Nadel tries to explain Georgian polyphonyby citing equivalents from Western mediaeval polyphony.In conclusion, Nadel’s book is a general introduction to Georgian songs and not toGeorgian polyphony in particular. Thus, the book tells more about Nadel himself thanabout Georgia. As a trained musicologist he was able to transcribe and analyse whateverkind of music was offered to him, be it African, Papua-New Guinean (Pöch), orCaucasian music 9 . By citing details, he always referred to his Georgian informant DavidGhambaschidse and the Russian and Georgian literature made accessible by him.The hypotheses expressed in Nadel’s book do not differ much from those expressedin earlier publications, for example, in “Der duale Sinn ..” (Nadel, 1931a),“Marimba-Musik” (Nadel, 1931b) or in his articles. As I pointed out earlier, Nadelwas very much influenced by his teachers in Vienna. In following Robert Lach’s idea(Lach, 1930:15ff.) Caucasian polyphony is seen in a hierarchical structure, fromsimple, like Svanetian, to most complex forms, like Gurian, different forms exist sideby side. And like Josef Strzygowski, his teacher in art theory, Nadel assumes thatWest European mediaeval culture did not exist independently of Eastern cultures (Nadel,1933:36ff.). In his review of Nadel’s book, published in Zeitschrift für VergleichendeMusikwissenschaft (Schneider, 1935:34ff.) Marius Schneider acknowledges the highquality of Nadel’s analysis, but does not follow Nadel in differentiating older andyounger strata in Georgian polyphony. And he also does not stress the idea of theCaucasian origin of European mediaeval polyphony, carefully expressed in Nadel1933:41. However, the assumption that Georgian polyphony was probably somehowhistorically connected with mediaeval polyphony was later taken up by MariusSchneider (1940), without mentioning Nadel at all 10 .It is rather strange that Schneider takes Nadel’s transcriptions as granted and doesnot try to go back to the sound examples themselves, which would easily have beenpossible. Instead he argues on the basis of his own research on polyphony (Schneider,1934). Source critique was not applied at that time, but following common traits(“Kulturkreislehre”) was en vogue.In 1934 another publication of Nadel appeared (Nadel, 1934), devoted to Caucasianmusical instruments, where he – in following Hornbostel and Sachs – exemplifiesideas about the origin of musical instruments. Nadel had the possibility of measuringseveral Caucasian wind instruments kept in the Leipzig Museum of Ethnography11 and came to the conclusion that in contrast to Georgian polyphony the musicalinstruments under discussion, namely flutes and oboes, clearly reveal their relationshipwith ancient oriental musical cultures (Babylonian, Sumerian etc.). He points out

112 Susanne Zieglerthat polyphony – which in his opinion can be regarded as typical for Georgian music– and musical instruments found in the Caucasus region do not have much in common.Unfortunately, Nadel did not have any sound examples of Georgian instrumentalmusic, so he was wrong in some of his conclusions.Nadel did not publish any further articles about Georgian or Caucasian music. Itwould have been a great chance, had he had the opportunity to go to Georgia for fieldrecordings, as imposed by the loan of a phonograph from the Berlin Phonogramm-Archiv.ConclusionIn the following years Nadel turned away from comparative musicology and earnedhis merits in anthropology, becoming one of the most influential figures in anthropology.One reason that is also stressed in several publications was probably that he didnot feel well in Germany because of the growing Nazi propaganda. 12But there may have been other reasons as well which have to do with the subjectsas such. From his curriculum vitae it becomes evident that Nadel started with musicology,but that he became more and more interested in psychology and anthropology.Thus, transcribing and analysing were not connected with real life. The alternative,comparative musicology or ethnomusicology, at least at that time, was not verymuch different from musicology, but more or less regarded as armchairethnomusicology, since most of the scholars did not conduct fieldwork themselves.Nadel surely had in mind to do fieldwork, probably also in Georgia, but in fact he didfieldwork only in Nigeria. He recorded with a phonograph, but his main concern wasobviously not music, but ethnographical studies. And no single musicological publicationabout his field recordings in Africa has ever been published. However, theremight be unpublished manuscripts which have not been found yet.Several publications have dealt with Nadel as anthropologist 13 , but his musicologicaland especially ethnomusicological studies have never been the subject of intensiveinvestigation. There is enough material to be studied, and the publication onGeorgian songs should be studied as part of more complex and general researchabout music. In judging Nadel’s publications it is my impression that he wrote aboutGeorgian songs by coincidence, yet he did not further investigate the problem ofGeorgian music to any great extent.Notes1Cf. Salat 1983:23–30. I am gratefully indebted to Jana Salat for sharing valuable informationabout Nadel with me.2According to other sources than Salat also Frederick or Fred.3Gerda Lechleitner from the Vienna Phonogrammarchiv kindly provided the information

Ziegfried E. Nadel and his Contributionto Georgian Polyphony113that in the Almanach of the years 1929-32 it is mentioned that Nadel (in the last addressedas Dr. Nadel, Berlin) worked in the Archive and prepared lectures.4See “Phonogrammarchiv”. Staatliche Akademische Hochschule für Musik in Berlin zuCharlottenburg. 53. Jahresbericht für den Zeitraum vom 1. Oktober 1931 bis zum 30.September 1932, p. 25.5Wax cylinder collections recorded by Bernhard Ankermann in Cameroon (1908), HansWaldow in Southern Cameroon (1907), Bernhard Struck in Portuguese–Guinea (1930).6For details about the history of the recordings of the Prussian Phonographic Kommissionsee Ziegler 2000.7Lautarchiv of Humboldt-Univerity Berlin, sign. LA 1298-1303.8Cf. letter of July 5, 1933 (L.B.66/33) in the Humboldt-University Archive, Institut fürLautforschung.9In his publication (1933:19) Nadel mentions in a footnote: “I am also referring to my yetunpublished treatise of Caucasian (Abkhaz, Svan and Ossetian) songs in the BerlinPhonogrammarchiv”. This is without doubt the wax cylinder collection of music recordedby Adolf Dirr in the Caucasus in 1909-1913, later transcribed and published by MariusSchneider (Schneider, 1940).10Cf. Ziegler & Traub 1990.11Nadel does not mention a specific date for this project, but in the text he refers to thealready completed book on Georgian songs of 1933.12Cf. Salat 1983:26. Ziegler, Susanne & Traub, Andreas. (1990). “Mittelalterlicheund kaukasische Mehrstimmigkeit - Neue Überlegungen zu einem alten Thema.” eiträgezur Musikwis-senschaft 32 (3):214-227.13See for example Salat 1983 and Firth 1956.ReferencesUnpublished Sources:Phonogramm-Archiv Berlin - Correspondence Universitätsarchiv der Humboldt-UniversitätBerlin, Institut für Lautforschung.Firth, Raymond. (1956). “Siegfried Frederick Nadel, 1903-1956. Obituary.” American Anthropologist59 (1):117-124.Födermayr, Franz and Lechleitner, Gerda. (1998). “Siegfried Nadel (1903-1956) als Autor der“anonymen” Transkriptionen der Pöchschen Musikaufnahmen aus Neuguinea identifiziert.”Österreichische Musik– Musik in Österreich. Beiträge zur Musikgeschichte Mitteleuropas.

114 Susanne ZieglerTheophil Antonicek zum 60. Geburtstag. Hrg. Elisabeth Th. Hilscher, p. 665-671.Lach, Robert. (1928). Gesänge russischer Kriegsgefangener aufgenommen und herausgegebenvon R. Lach. III. Band Kaukasusvölker. 1.Abteilung: Georgische Gesänge.Transkription und Übersetzung der Texte von A. Dirr. [Akademie der Wissenschaften inWien, 55. Mitteilung der Phonogramm-Archivs-Kommission, phil.-hist. KlasseSitzungsberichte, 204. Band, 4.Abhandl.] Wien/Leipzig: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky.Lach, Robert. (1930) Gesänge russischer Kriegsgefangener aufgenommen undherausgegeben von R. Lach.III. Band Kaukasusvölker. 2.Abteilung: Mingrelische, abchasische,svanische und ossetische Gesänge. Transkription und Übersetzung der Texte vonDr. Robert Bleichsteiner. [Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, 65. Mitteilung derPhonogrammarchivs-Kommission, phil.-hist. Klasse Sitzungsberichte, 205. Band,1.Abhandl.] Wien/Leipzig: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1925). Zur Psychologie des Konsonanzerlebens. Dissertation Phil. Fac.University of Vienna.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1928a).“Zum Begriff der Musikalität.” Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft11 (1):23-42.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1928b). “Die Struktur der Tonsysteme in der primitiven Musik”. Prague:Congress paper at the 1 st Congress for Folk Art.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1928c). “Das Problem des Zyklus in der primitiven Musik”. Prague:Congress paper at the 1 st Congress for Folk Art.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1930). “The Origins of Music”. Musical Quarterly 1930, XVI: 531-546.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1931a). Der duale Sinn der Musik. Versuch einer musikalischenTypologie. Regensburg: Bosse Verlag.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1931b). Marimba-Musik. 62. Mitteilung der Phonogrammarchivs-Kommission.[Akademie der Wiss. in Wien, phil.-hist. Klasse Sitzungsberichte, 212.Band,3.Abhandl.] Wien/Leipzig: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1931c). Ferruccio Busoni (1886-1924). Leipzig: Breitkopf und Haertel.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1933). Georgische Gesänge. Berlin 1933/ Lautabteilung. Leipzig:Harrassowitz.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1934). “Messungen an kaukasischen Grifflochpfeifen.” Anthropos 29(3-4):469-475.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1942). A Black Byzantium. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Nadel, Siegfried F. (1954). Nupe Religion. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.Salat, Jana. (1983). Reasoning as enterprise. The anthropology of S.F. Nadel. Göttingen:Edition Herodot. [Monographica 2].

Ziegfried E. Nadel and his Contributionto Georgian Polyphony115Schneider, Marius. (1934) Geschichte der Mehrstimmigkeit. Historische und phänomenologischeStudien. Erster Teil. Die Naturvölker. Berlin: Julius Bard. (Zweiter Teil 1935. DieAnfänge in Europa. Berlin: Julius Bard.)Schneider, Marius. (1935). “Diskussionen. Zur außereuropäischen Mehrstimmigkeit.” Zeitschriftfür vergleichende Musikwissenschaft, Jg. 3:34-38Schneider, Marius. (1940). “Kaukasische Parallelen zum europäischen Mittelalter.” ActaMusicologica 12:52–61.Schneider, Marius. (1969). Geschichte der Mehrstimmigkeit. Historische und phänomenologischeStudien. 2. Auflage von 1934/35 mit einem zusätzlichen Teil III: “Die Kompositionsprinzipienund ihre Verbreitung. Mit 115 Notenbeispielen als Anhang.” Tutzing: HansSchneider.Ziegler, Susanne. (1989). “Kavkaskoe mnogogolosie v zerkale nemeckojazychnoj muzykovedcheskojliteratury.” Paper presented at the conference on folk polyphony, held in Bordzhomi,Georgia (former Soviet Union) October 15-22, 1988. Published in Georgian in: SabchotaKhelovneba 1, 1989:125-131.Ziegler, Susanne. (1992). “Kaukasische Mehrstimmigkeit im Spiegel der deutschsprachigenmusikwissen-schaftlichen Literatur”. Von der Vielfalt musikalischer Kultur. FestschriftJosef Kuckertz. Hrsg. Rüdiger Schumacher. Wort und Musik -Salzburger AkademischeBeiträge 12, 587-596.Ziegler, Susanne. (2000). “Die akustischen Sammlungen. Historische Tondokumente imPhonogramm-Archivund im Lautarchiv.” Katalog der Ausstellung Theatrum naturae etartis - Wunderkammern des Wissens. Essays. Hrsg. Horst Bredekamp, Jochen Brüning,Cornelia Weber. Henschel-Verlag Berlin, 197-206.Ziegler, Susanne. (2006). Die Wachszylinder des Berliner Phonogramm-Archivs. 512 p. +CD-ROM. Ethnologisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz.