Early Guitars and Vihuela

A network for historic guitars and vihuelas

 I am thinking about making a Gittern and was wondering if anyone had information about the gauge of the strings needed for this instrument, and also information about the tuning notes.

Views: 1141

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It will be 38cm between the bridge and nut,as for tuning,this is information that I am trying to find out.Does anyone have this information please?

thanx

Thanx once again for your info,as I intend making a gittern,I can make slight adjustments to obtain a string length of 43cm.

Dear Andrew, you can find more information at our sister website http://cittern.ning.com/. If you use the search box there you will find more documentation.

Dear Jelma,

I was under the impression that the gittern was gut strung; unlike the wire strung cittern discussed on the cittern.ning site.

Martyn

Early gitterns - like the example in Eisenach were gut strung.  The 'guiterne' name was also used for, or perhaps developed into, the 4 course guitar of Morlaye, Gorlier, etc in the middle of the 16th century.  At the beginning of the 17th century Praetorius mentions a guitar-like tuning for the (metal-strung) English treble cittern.  By 1656 this instrument is being called a gitterne (Tabley ms.) by Sir Peter Leycester, and subsequently by John Playford.  Presumably the 4-course guitar had disappeared by this time, in England at least, so that the name was transferred with the tuning.  The last English pictures of the little guitar that I know of date from 1600 ± 5 years, and 1604. 

Many thanks Peter.

I had assumed, because of the tuning mentioned, that Andrew Penwright was interested in the early gut string instrument; hence my observation - but I may be wrong!

Regarding Playford, I'm not sure there is a direct link between Leycester's instrument and Playford's: I know (or think I know) that the engraving in his publication containing gittern music shows a cittern type instrument - but I'd gained the impression this was simply because of employing the identical plate for his gittern and for his cittern pieces.  If so perhaps P's gittern was, after all, guitar shaped (ie incurved sides)?  Again, I may be wrong since this is at the limit of my knowledge about the cittern!

regards

Martyn

There is one guitar-shaped cithrinchen in Dean castle, but the well-known Playford engraving, and the preparatory drawing (front and back of LS Journal XXI) show a small cittern, violin? and kit hanging together on the wall behind the citternist.  Leycester (FoMRHI comm. 774), talks of the gitterne - "Like unto this (the psithyrne or cittern) is the instrument we now usually call a Gitterne, which is onely a Treble Psithyrne, beinge somewhat lesse than the other, yeildinge a more Treble Sweet Sound, havinge the same number & the same order of Wyre-stringes & played upon with a Quill after the same order as the Psithyrne; onely some variation in the Tuninge which may also be baryed (sic: borrowed?) in the Psithyrne at pleasure."

In other words: a gittern was then a small cittern with a different tuning.  The unproven but surely logical jump is that the small cittern shown on Playford's volume is this instrument.

(Originally noticed if I remember correctly, by Donald Gill).

Dear Peter,

Many thanks for this and advance apologies for my dimness in this area where you are one of the undoubted authorities.

As far as I'm aware, Ward's extended paper in LSJ XXI is still a recognised good secondary source and collects together much information about the cittern etc.  Ward records that only two surviving Playford publications mention the Cithern and/or Gittern: that of 1652 (A Booke of New Lessons FOR THE CITHERN & GITTERN); and that of 1666  (Musick's Delight ON THE CITHREN). Thus only one extant publication mentions Gittern (and as secondary to the Cithern). I therefore think it more likely that the instrument depicted being played on on LSJXXI front and back is a Cithern rather than a Gittern.  Perhaps the use of the same engraving on the title page of both parts of the 1652 publication might simply be to save the cost of engraving a second plate.

So it seems to me that we only have the Leycester source, which does seem to be quite clear, that the Gittern is nothing but a small Cithern.  However, Ward reports that in the MS the original term for this small Cithern is struck out.  (ie the words '...tearme a Kit some...''  struck out).  So the original sentence read: 'Like unto this is the Instrument, we now usually tearme a Kit some call a gitterne,....'  which makes me wonder.  In short, whilst the weight of (pretty skimpy) evidence seems to suggest that the instrument depicted in the Playford engraving is equally likely to be a gittern as a cittern,  there remains a possibility that perhaps the mid 17th century English gittern may not have been cittern shaped after all.  Incidentally I see no reason to suppose that the instrument on the wall in the Playford engraving, and which looks to me much the same size as the instrument being played, isn't a cithern rather than a gittern.  Perhaps all this has been discussed at length elsewhere so, again, please excuse my ignorance and point me to that discussion/other relevant papers.

I'm seeing Donald G in a couple of weeks so will ask him about this too.

regards

Martyn

Now armed with a photograph of Tabley on the screen in front of me.

Leycester originally wrote " - Like unto this is the Instrument, we now usually do tearme a kit, some call it a Gitterne, wch indeed is onely a Treble Psittyrne ---" .  Parts of this are crossed out so that it becomes " - Like unto this is the Instrument, we now usually do call a Gitterne, wch indeed is onely - etc".  Additionally "Gittern" has been added in the margin adjacent to the crossing-out of "tearme a kit, some".

It seems fairly clear that Leycester dozed and corrected himself.   This is on page 86.  He is listing the wire stringed instruments on page 90 and again refers to "The Psittyrne, & from thence the Gitterne: of wch I have made mention before fo:85. (sic).

Perhaps he had the New Lessons in front of him - the illustration clearly seems to indicate a usual-sized (c. 43-45 cm sl) cittern being played, with ,on the wall behind, the smaller 'gittern' alongside the kit and violin for which he also wrote and by which its size may be judged.

Give my best wishes to Donald.  I owe him a message, and have some more questions myself!

Dear Martyn - ,

The point Ward (and Peter Forrester) makes is that by Playford's time the memory of the old small waisted guitar had gone to be replaced by a gut strung cittern shaped instrument. If you read our earlier exchanges you'll see some of the evidence for this.  I'm not entirely convinced, but I wouldn't go as far as you seem to by suggesting that ' the Gittern would have disappeared from existence by Playfords era for certain but Gittern/Quinterne has often been used to refer to a guitar like instrument.'.  I think the jury is out.....

Incidentally you might be best to put your surname as well as first name to these messages - since some may confuse the two of us!

Martyn (Hodgson)

Martyn (H).   I think (or hope) I spotted a senior moment - should be "replaced by a WIRE strung cittern shaped.."  Leycester is quite definite about the wire; I think but haven't checked that Praetorius is also for the zitterlein.  I ought to quarrel with "shaped" - the instrument is a treble cittern, retuned, and called a gittern.

I suspect that all of this should be on the cittern site, and that Andrew wants to have an Eisenach-type gut-strung 15th c. gittern.  I've only made a couple, George Stevens has made a lot.  My experience, and with a lot of rebecs, suggests that its best to carve out most of the inside first while there is something to cramp firmly.  Ideal grain direction is as though working with  half of a split branch - this puts the area of least shrinkage adjacent to the belly.  There will still be some shrinkage, so work on it (or two?) slowly over some months.  Tension depends on the type of bridge, string length, how it will be played, sound-board thickness and barring,  If you think of a medium to heavy lute tension you should not be far out.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Jelma van Amersfoort.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service