Talk:Gittern

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Classical music Musical Instruments Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of musical instruments on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Musical InstrumentsWikipedia:WikiProject Musical InstrumentsTemplate:WikiProject Musical Instrumentsmusical instruments articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

The picture, of the "Warwick Castle gittern," is of a mislabelled instrument which, by all modern accounts, is actually a cithole. Furthermore, the face of the instrument, which is practically all that is visible in the photo, is a sixteenth-century modification which tries to turn the cithole into a violin. It would be better to find a permitted photo of a medieval depiction or a modern reconstruction of an actual gittern, or maybe both.208.100.230.206 18:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some edits that were reverted as vandalism may have possibly been a new contributor that speaks another primary language. I'm putting some here that might be good in the article if cleaned up and given a reference.Jacqke (talk) 15:46, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The first Arab lutes were mounted with only 4 strings of silk threads from here the word "Chahar" four and "tar" strings from which the Arabic word qîtâra from which they derive then

citole and guitar

. Also firts guitars in middle ages were mounted with five strings and were called "quinterna" from latin quinque = five and from persian (arab) tar = string, after in 1300 were mounted with four strings (3 double and 1 single) and were called in italy "Chitarra" from persian "chahar" = four and "tar" = string.

it's name seems to be common with cithara (or khitara or kinnor a kind of lyre). It were mounted also with five strings and were called "Quinterna" from latin quinque = five and from persian (arab) tar = string

The first Arab lutes were mounted with only 4 strings of silk threads from here the word "Chahar" four and "tar" strings from which the Arabic word Qîtâra from which they derive this names:

citole and chitarra

.

The above material seems to have come from the Italian web page for the guitar. I am also adding it here. It needs to be sourced, but would be a good fit for a section of this article.

The modern guitar originates from the baroque guitar which in turn derives from the medieval quinterna who had five strings quinterna (from the Latin "quinque" = five, and from the Persian "tar" = string). The first medieval guitar had four strings as well as the lute : The first Arab lutes were mounted with only 4 strings of silk threads the word "Chahar from here" four "Tar" strings from which the Arabic word Qîtâra from which also derive words: kithara , the quinterna gittern Gittern , citole and guitar in Italy. Jacqke (talk) 16:05, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The caption on the illustration of an instrument in the Metropolitan Museum of Art collection ("One of the three 'gitterns' may not be") cites an exhibition catalogue from 1968 asserting that the instrument is a rebec or another bowed instrument rather than a gittern, and thereby implying that James Tyler's assessment in The Early Mandolin is incorrect.

This is problematic, at best. Tyler's book was published in 1992, twenty-four years after the catalogue. No compelling argument against Tyler's scholarship is cited; I find myself suspecting that whoever composed the caption believes that working for the institution in possession of an artefact somehow grants one greater discernment than that of a mere professional scholar with decades of experience. Curators at an art museum are experts on visual art, but frequently lack the specialised knowledge needed to assess functional artefacts, such as musical instruments, in their historical and practical contexts. Today's curators will often consult trained scholars; those of fifty years ago tended not to.

Also, the present-day catalogue of the Metropolitan Museum of Art describes the instrument in question as a mandora. (https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/503048) Although they continue to hold out the possibility of it as a bowed instrument, there is nothing of the confident "... probably wasn't a gittern but a bowed instrument..." found in the current, and misleading, caption.