Reconstructing the Medieval Arabic Lute: A Reconsideration of Farmer's 'Structure of the

Arabic and Persian Lute'

Author(s): Curtis Bouterse
Source: The Galpin Society Journal, Vol. 32 (May, 1979), pp. 2-9
Published by: Galpin Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/841532
Accessed: 28/02/2009 02:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=gal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Galpin Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Galpin Society
Journal.

http://www.jstor.org
 CURTIS BOUTERSE

Reconstructing the Medieval

Arabic Lute: a Reconsideration
of Farmer's'Structure of the
Arabic and Persian Lute'
A who attempts to recreate the music of medieval Europe
NYONE
must labour under a multitude of burdens, conceptual and con-
crete; theoreticalas well as physicallimitations; perceptionsof the past
and present. The greatest problem facing those interested in early
instrumentsand performanceis the fact that practicallyno instruments
are extant from before I450. Almost all our information is derived
from iconography and though this is a rich and rewarding source, it
is rather limited (not to say one-dimensional) and we could wish for
more hard data. Fortunately we may find some with the help of
Orientalists,since virtually all medieval Europeanmusical instruments
were introduced from the East, either through Byzantium or the
Islamic world. Though many forms evolved considerably after their
arrival,some remainedessentiallythe same for centuries,most notably
the lute. Dr Henry George Farmer, the great and prolific scholar of
medieval Islamic music, has left us several sets of measurementsfrom
theoretical treatises on the lute which can provide useful data once
certain key problems are resolved.'
The shape of the medieval European lute as we know it, with its
rather round body, distinct neck, and usually a central sound hole or
rose, was a ratherlate occurence. Curt Sachsbelieved it was developed
in Moorish Spain and spreadback to the Middle East.This is probable,
though there is a wide variationin the shape from earliesttimes which
hint at it. The most common early lutes, as depicted from Central
Asia through the Middle East and into Europe, were morphologically
distinctive: a more almond shape than later, shoulder sloping to the
neck, and often paired soundholes. This is the lute most often seen in
Andalusia and Sicily (Fig. I).2 By the time of the illustrationsin the
Cantigasthis seems to have been obsolete. Its earlier forms, including
perhapsthe Persian barbat,were made in one piece, with the neck an
integral part of the body. As Sachshas pointed out,3 frets would have
2
 -j

C. D.
(comrosite)

FIG. I

A. ManichaeanMS., 8-gth C., Turfan, Sinkiang. Plate 4, Mani and

Manichaeism, Geo Widengren,New York, 1965.
B. 'Portrait'of Albertde Gapeuses,trobador, c. 13th century.MS. No. 64,
Byzantine and Medieval Music, R. Goldron, N.Y., 1968.
C. Islamicstylepaintingon ceiling,CappellaPalatina;Fig. 33.
D. European-naive stylepaintingin aisleof CappellaPalatina,Palermo,12th
century.Fig. 34 (composite of two similarlutes),Music of the Spheres
and the Dance of Death, KathiMayer-Baer,Princeton,1970.

been difficult to tie on the sloping neck, but since Farmer has con-
clusively proved that the Arabs did use frets on their lutes in the
Middle Ages,4 the advantage of the separateneck must have become
obvious. Most iconographic sources show the lute in course of being
played, and since artisticconventions of the period place the left hand
holding the neck roughly at the joint with the body, it is difficult to
say whether the instrumentshad a separateneck or not. We do not
know exactly when the lutes began being built up from ribs rather
than being carvedfrom a block or, indeed, whether this was considered
a 'development' or whether they were simply alternative methods,
but the Arab manuscripts from at least the Ioth century onward
mention ribs as standardconstruction.5Neither do we know the exact
relationship between the traditional 'Eastern' shaped lute and the
3
rounder 'European' shape: whether it was a matter of acoustical
development or merely stylistic. However, since the manuscripts
describedby Farmer, though delineating the 'Eastern'shape, refer to
the neck as having a specific length, my assumption is that this was a
separate entity. Although the construction seems to have changed
substantially,from carved to carvel, the traditionalshapewas retained.6

The earliestspecificationscited by Farmerare those of Al-Kindi (gth

century) which are tantalisinglyincomplete and, with one exception,
given by proportions.The depth of the body was one half the breadth
at the widest point, i.e. the ideal cross-sectionat the widest point is a
semicircle,a common and recurringform for the back as we shall see.7
The 'beating place of the strings',8which was protected by a strip of
tortoise shell, was at the widest point of the body and the tenth part
of the string-length, which was 67.5 cm.9 Unfortunately, this frag-
mentary jumble of dimensions and proportions does not overlap
sufficiently to allow calculation either of complete proportions or of
overall dimensions,but it will be surprisinglyuseful later. The Ikhwan
al-Safa (Ioth century) left us a manuscript which is wholly propor-
tional: the depth is once again half the width, the body's length is
one-and-a-halftimes the width, and the neck is one quarterthe overall
length. At last we can see the dim outlines of a complete lute.10
Four hundred years later we have two manuscriptswith complete
dimensions: one in Arabic, by Ibn al-Tahhan, and one in Persian,the
Kanz al-tuhaf. The measurementsin the Kanz al-tuhaf, according to
Farmer, indicate an instrument approximately 17 cm. deep, 34 cm.
wide (I: 2 proportions again), and 162 cm. long; i.e. almost 5 ft. 4 in.
tall! This large figure could be dismissedas a typographicalerror but
for Farmer's presentation of Ibn al-Tahhan's dimensions as 28 in.
wide and 5 ft. i in. long! These preposterousfigures may account
for the general lack of attention to his article. Dr Farmer, not taken
aback by these measurements,went on to refer to these instruments
'of considerable dimensions' as 'arch-lutes' of the type portrayed in
Persian miniatures.But even if we assumedthey were played 'on the
shoulders of giants', a lute 5 ft. 4 in. long and only 13 in. wide is far
beyond the wildest vagaries of artisticlicense."

The solution to this tangle lies, I believe, in the original measuring

system. Though it is a risky businessto tamper with historicalinform-
ation, critical analysis is always needed and, especially in medieval
musicology with its paucity of data, even musical intuition may have
to be brought to bear. I am neither Arabist nor musicologist of the

4
statureof Dr Farmer,but both the Arab and PersianMSS. of the I4th
century seem to use an easily confused system of measurement. The
Persianangusht(Arabic isba,plural asabi)was 2.25 cm. and the angusht
nmundam (Arabic isba madmum)was twice as long, 4.5 cm. It seems
obvious that scribal error could account for distortion by a factor of
two, in either direction.I should be very surprisedto hearfrom scholars
that this was not common in manuscriptsof the period. In the case of
the lute from the Kanz al-tuhaf, if we read 36 angushtinstead of 36
angushtmundam,we find an instrument of feasible dimensions which
matches our expectationsfrom iconography as well. This new length,
8I cm., gives us another and remarkable confirmation. Subtracting
the distanceof the bridge from the bottom (13.5 cm. according to the
manuscript)gives a string length of 67.5 cm., exactly the same as in
Al-Kindi five centuriesearlier.There remains one other problem: we
know the width of the body, but not wherethe widest point occurs.
The extreme possibilitiesrange from an oval to a quite flattened tear-
drop. A very logical, consistent and conforming piece of information
from s1th-century Europe provides a possible solution. Arnault of
Zwolle tells us that the bottom of the body should be a semicircle, as
is the cross-sectionof the back (cf. above). This assumption provides
the link between proportion and measurementwhich enablesus exact-
ly to fix all the data.
Keeping these two modifications in mind-selective reduction or
augmentation by a factor of two, and the semicircularbottom-we
arrive at shapes and specificationsfor two lutes of similar sizes. The
smaller of the two, from the Kanz al-tuhaf, is 81 cm. long; the neck
one quarterof the overall length (20.25 cm.); the body width (at its
widest point, 16.875 cm. from the bottom) is 33.75 cm.; the bridge
is 13.5 cm. from the bottom; string length 67.5 cm.; and the depth is
16.875 cm. Fig. 2 shows (left) the instrument as measured in the
manuscriptand (right) as corrected above.
The larger of the two lutes (Ibn al-Tahhan'sMS.) presentsa more
difficultproblem. The measurementsseem particularlycorrupt and to
obtain an instrument matching reality it is necessary to reduce both
length and width by half. The length is then go cm. overall and 36 cm.
wide. The neck is given in absolute, not proportional, measurements,
which make it longer than the usual one fourth, but certainly not
impossible; it is to be the same length as the pegbox (the only inform-
ation we have on that part, though it seems ratherlong in this instance)
or 29.25 cm. Two additional anomalies remain. The bridge seems to
need increasing from 2 asabifrom the bottom to 2 asabimadmum,or
9 cm. This makes a string length of 8i cm. and puts the widest part of

S
 7WM m7e KAAeAL-TUUHAf
AfE45SU&EMEkTS

36a.
(81 cm.)

O.?o

i5 a.. --..5a..- \ \

MEF.uREEs u..
1AD ED

MAE45IEM/rs /uMS an t AS A 1
ASp? THI MS
T// M5.
AnyuSitMIlwlaw

FIG. 2

the body at roughly the tenth part of the string length, as in Al-Kindi.
The remaining measurementis the depth of the back; the manuscript
gives us 27 cm., which may be correct but seemsratherdeep compared
with other sources. Iconography is seldom helpful with the backs of
instruments,alas! Half that figure is too thin, and the proportion of
Al-Kindi and the Ikhwan al-Safa, namely half the width (I8 cm.), lies
between the two extremes. We are left with a dilemma or else a very
deep soundbox. The results, including the three depths, are shown in
Fig. 3.
6
 MESURE1ENArs/TS
fO ZA/ AL-T,HA/H

. <
N

.o * 29.tS cm.

:* /

: A . I
-12A.--

vc. /
* /6a*.

AfMEAW~EMEW7-2
a I
_ a
- 2
A4 pEg -77E S.s
AsabiMaimum- I/2 wi-tfk C(Al-kini)

FIG. 3

An interesting point is that when the plans of the two lutes are
compared, except for the longer neck of the Arab instrument, the
bodies are of almost identical size. Both are 60.75 cm. long and their
widths are 36 cm. versus 33.75 cm. Those are very tight parameters
for coincidence. The depth, as mentioned, and the bridge placementdo
differ substantially,but closer study of the original manuscripts,or
additionalsources may serve to narrow the gaps.

7
 In our searchfor data on medieval instrumentswe cannot afford to
ignore anything, even though, as in this case, it seems to be outside
the mainstreamof our inquiry. This particularform of lute may have
been extinct early enough not to have had any direct influence on the
dominant Europeantype, but it was the instrumentand its construction
techniques which introduced the idea of 'lute' to Europe and, at least
in Spain, it enjoyed unsurpassedpopularity for half a dozen centuries.
If we aspire, as I do, to recreate medieval Spanish music in all its
dazzling diversity of influences and instruments,then it is incumbent
on us to build and restorethis lute to its rightful place of honour.

NOTES
His article,'The Structureof the ArabianandPersianLutein the Middle
I
Ages', appearedin the Journalof the RoyalAsiaticSocietyin 1939 and was
reprintedin his Studiesin OrientalMusicalInstruments,
II. It is almostincom-
prehensiblethatin all theseyearsno one hasnoticedthe discrepancies in his
measurements; andover thirty-fiveyearslateran articlein AsianMusiccredits
Dr Farmerwith havingdescribeda medievalArabiclute 'threefeet wide',
withoutraisingan eyebrow,rhetoricalor otherwise.Musicologists areindeed
a raretribewhennone balkat tryingto reachrounda three-foot-widelute!
2 The most famousexamplesoccur on the many Moorishivory caskets,
particularlythe LeireCasketin PamplonaCathedraland the 'Bote de Almo-
guira' (al-Mughiza, d. 968) and the 'Bote de Davillier' (Ioth century), both in
the Louvre.
3 Historyof MusicalInstruments, New York, 1940, p. 254.
4 'Was the Arabianand PersianLute Fretted?',JRAS, I937.
5 If this carvel constructionwas being used prior to the introduction of the
lute into Europe, it hardly seems likely, as David Munrow held, that Europeans
were hollowing their lutes out of blocks until the Renaissance.(See his Instru-
mentsof the MiddleAges andRenaissance,1976, p. 25.)
6 Exactly how the neck joins the sloping shouldersof this particular-shaped
body is still problematical,but a thorough survey of the iconography should
shed some light. There seems to be, for example, a depiction of a lute in profile
in Ars Islamica,IX, p. 115. (See also Fig. I.)
7 We should be ever aware of the influence of 'ideal proportion' of cos-
mological importance or even 'purely' geometrical structures from Greek
and other Easternsources in our analysisof Arabic and Europeandocuments.
We do not know whether actuallute construction would have followed any
such theoretical models; the example of architecture, however, suggests
that it would.
8 Beating-place may sound a trifle harsh, but recall that the medieval lute
was played with a plectrum and, if modem ud practice is any guide, rather
percussivelyat that.
9 Actually, after telling us the 'beating place of the strings' was 6.75 cm.
from the bridgeand a tenththe lengthof the strings,Farmerconcludesthat
8
the string length was 75.25 cm! Bessaraboff,in his excellent AncientEuropean
MusicalInstruments, assumes there were eleven parts to the string length and
corrects Farmer's'slip of the pen' to read 74.25 cm. He also garbles the pro-
portions of the Ikhwan al-Safa lute.
10 It is possible the correlationwith Al-Kindi's measurementsis even more
direct than first reading would indicate. The passagebegins: 'It has been said,
"Seek help in every art from its own people". So we say that the people of this
art [of music] have said that we ought to make the instrumentwhich is called
the lute of wood, its length and its width and its depth being in the most
excellent proportions'.Consideringthe importanceof Authority in a tradition-
al society, they might easily have been referringto Al-Kindi.
II Late medieval Persian, and Mughal, illuminations of lutes do seem to
portray 'archlutes' larger than those shown elsewhere, but the proportions
depicted are unique and differ primarily in being much widerthan usual.