RE: LUTE-etymology

[Dr. Marion Ceruti]

Dear Garry,

Thank you for your attempt to clarify this issue. I cannot open
the URL, so here is my contribution.

Combustible fuels and many lubricants come from processed crude
oil but they are not the same thing just because the have the same
origin. The processing is different and the applications are different.
Similarly, leather and parchment are related but not identical. Not
all leather is parchment and not all parchment is leather, but some
is. Here are the relevant definitions:

leather - animal skin dressed for use, (among other definitions)
A leather garment is also called a "leather." Absent from the
definition is the kind of animal from which the leather is derived.

parchment - 1. the skin of a sheep or goat prepared for writing on
2. strong, tough and often translucent paper made to resemble
parchment

Leather appears to be a more generalized category that could
be said to include parchment but it is not normally used that way.
Mostly it refers to clothing, such as belts, hats, jackets, shoes, etc.
or maybe luggage, seats, frames, side  bags, riding applications
among many others. I don't know about anyone else but when
I think of leather I do not also think of parchment even though
their origins could be similar.

Parchment, on the other hand is specifically applied to writing.
No other use is specified. Even paper that resembles the skin
is called parchment, thus emphasizing the writing application.
Skin from cows does not qualify as parchment but it does as
leather.

If leather has been used as a lute-building material I suspect that
it is because it was easier for early instrument builders (who predate
the renaissance by quite a long time) to stretch a skin over a wooden
support structure than it would be to cut a thin slab of spruce or other
wood and attach it. Maybe a luthier on the list would like to comment
on why leather or parchment would have been considered as a lute
building material.

Best regards,
Marion


-----Original Message-----
From: Garry Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Mar 22, 2005 6:47 AM
To: 'Lutelist' <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: RE: LUTE-etymology

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=parchment+leather




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doctor Oakroot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 9:20 AM
> To: Lutelist
> Subject: Re: LUTE-etymology
> 
> Well, as a native English speaker, I would say "leather" definitely does
> not include "parchment" (even though they're made from the same raw
> material). Depending on the speaker, it may not even include "skin" (from
> a dead animal as opposed to on a living animal) which is another likely
> lute (in the broad sense) covering material.
> 
> >>> "FYI", there are no references to leather soundboards. Parchment, yes;
> >>
> >> well, there are. Take a look into good old Oswald Koerte's thesis. He
> >> cites related Arabic authors. And, okay, parchment does not qualify as
> >> leather to you, obviously. To me, it does.
> > As it should, to most people. Or at least to those who know what parchment
> > is made of.
> > RT
> >
> >
> >
> > To get on or off this list see list information at
> > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> >
> 
> 
> --
> http://DoctorOakroot.com - Rough-edged songs on homemade GIT-tars.
>