Talk:Celtic harp

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 5 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MikeySanchez.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Irish Harp
I suppose a lot of the history of the Celtic harp in Ireland is covered by Coat of arms of Ireland, but it could really do with a separate article, or if not a reformatting of this article into Ireland and Scotland sections. Almost all of this article is written from the perspective of the Celtic harp in Scotland. Added to Wikiproject Irish Music to hopefully attract some more attention. NTF30 (talk) 22:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Merge proposal
Harp duplicates some info from Clàrsach, adds more and is missing more.

The section in Harp should be a short synopsis headed by a as per WP:GTL. All content should be on the specialised article. This reduces the risk of two diverging articles maintained in tandem by different people, rather than a single comprehensive article that everyone collaborates on. jnestorius(talk) 00:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Agree Brendandh 18:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes I agree, and it would help the Harp section if more of its subsections did this as it is arather rambling and confused piece all together!StrumStrumAndBeHanged 22:12, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Although I am but a layperson of harp history, I would find it much more comprehensive if the articles would be merged. I think both articles would benefit from this. Watto the jazzman 03:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I think Clarsach shouldn't be limited by the temporal heading of Medieval. Also the harp section under Music of Scotland overlaps. And I prefer to see more - make that any - citations. Msjmsj 12:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Why is a supposedly educational article about the Gaelic harp titled by a dialectic spelling like 'clàrsach' rather than the standard classical Gaelic spelling 'clàirseach' which should be the one English speakers are using when referring to the Gaelic harp in general? By using the spelling 'clàrsach' in English one is immediately referring solely to the Scottish Gaelic harp. A parallel would be to refer to Gaelic language as a whole as Gàidhlig. By using the spelling Gàidhlig in an English language text one is immediately referring to Scottish Gaelic.

Cruit
The word was not originally "cruit" - this refers to another type of harp. --MacRusgail 15:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

The original word was choros, chrotta, rotta of the word for a harp-lyre used by the early church. Although from a Gaelic perspective Cruit is the oldest word available for a harp-lyre, triangular harp until the use of Clarsach in the 1400s. Because the Picts left no written language it is unclear if the triangular harp was first mistakenly called a lyre (crot) or if the instrument (Cruit)name has a link to the Gaelic name for the pictish race (Cruith), which is similar in Old Irish. But what is clear is that in Irish/Scottish Gaelic 'cruit' is applied to the new high status instrument and Welsh 'crwth' was applied to the lyre. Celtic Harper 11:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

As support to Celtic Harper's comments here, 'cruit' does in fact refer to the triangular Gaelic harp. Gaelic grammar requires declension and both 'crot' and 'cruit' are declensions of the same word. This applies throughout the historical record. While we do not know with any exactitude when the triangular harp first appeared in Gaelic history, the fact is that the word 'cruit' has been used in Gaelic for the triangular harp since record of it appears, just as the word 'cruitire' has always been used for the player of the triangular harp.

'Crot', referring to a hump, does seem to link the cruit to the creation myth of the lyre and appears to be an older word than 'clàirseach'. However, the word 'tiompan' also appears to be older than the word 'clàirseach' and could equally have designated a Gaelic lyre. Gaelic literature citing the term 'cruit' dates only from the period after the triangular Gaelic harp enters the archaelogical record but documents oral material from centuries before. It is therefore perfectly conceivable that 'cruit' always designated a harp of some kind, whereas 'tiompan' always designated a lyre. Alternatively, prior to the arrival of a Gaelic harp, whether quadrangular or triangular, the word 'cruit' may have been used for a lyre and only later have been applied to Gaelic harp.

The word 'clàirseach' ostensibly appears to be the masculine word 'clàr' (board) feminised through the suffix '-seach' (a similar feature exists in English, for example, '-ess' as with 'murder' and 'murderess') and 'clàr' is a very ancient Gaelic word which was used to refer to the harp prior to the first appearance of the feminine form 'clàirseach'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.225.35 (talk) 00:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Cláirsigh in Irish art
The article states that the cláirseach originated in the Pictish area in Scotland and then moved to the Gaelic areas and then to Ireland. It justifies this statement by using arguments largly laid out in "Gaelic Harps & Harpers in Ireland & Scotland by The Honourable Robert Ruadh of the Isles" which has no historical basis. The fact that drawings used to verify this statement are on stones (on which artwork is very difficult to carbon date) does not prove this. If one was to work on this hypothesis then Rheims would be a likely place for the origin of the Cláirseach (Psalter of Utrecht was largely created there). I am no historian but even I am able to name two sources of Irish art where the Cláirseach is found. The first being the Shrine of St.Maedóic, the second I found today on the High Cross at Monasterboice in Co. Louth (with the date of the 923 ad carved on it - which is the accepted date of it's completion). I since found that there is another example found on the High Cross at Kells in Co. Meath. That's three, not one as is stated in the article. I'm sure if one was to carry out a little more research it would be possible to find more examples.

I feel that if the original author had based his/her research on something a little more solid it would have been more beneficial. Perhaps a visit to Early Gaelic Harpwould have been a better and more balanced place to begin.


 * With all due respect Muiris Ó Suilleabháin I have based my data on empirical studies on instruments from the (5th to 11th centuries) and something a bit more solid than what you state. I approve of credible empirical data, and Rheimes is one of the earliest locations for a triangular harp instrument. However other experts disagree “The earliest examples of a triangular harp comes from the British Isles” “Bruice Mitford The Sutton-Hoo lyre (1970), and “The earliest example we have of a triangular harp in Europe comes from the Nigg stone” Isobel Henderson, The Picts (1970) and the oldest credible depictions are Pictish, Francis W. Galpin and the Triangular Harps Otto Andersson (1966).

Also that;
 * “It is notable that Pictish harp depictions are at least 200 years older than any other European depiction of a triangular harp instrument. (Ross, p. 38; John Bannerman, "The Clarsach and Clarsair", in Scottish Studies, 30, 1991, pp. 1-17).
 * “There are thirteen depictions of harp from Pictish-era Scotland these triangular harps do not look like those depicted in later medieval Scotland or Ireland although they are the first.” Alasdair Ross, "Pictish Chordophone Depictions", in Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies, 36, 1998, esp. p. 41).

Indeed I have looked at the data from Ireland, as have the experts, regarding the cross at Kells and the Monasterboice carving. I would include these as valid references, however;
 * “Many of the stones show various type of lyre, e.g the one shown from Clonmacnoise. These instruments are not harps; they have a flat sound box with a bridge and tailpiece to hold the strings.” Alasdair Ross 'Harps of Their Owne Sorte' (1998).
 * “Although there are more stringed instruments depicted on Irish stones than Pictish stones in this period, there are no credible triangular stringed harp instruments depicted on any Irish stone. (Joan Rimmer, The Irish Harp, (Cork, 1969)
 * “Lyres are often confused with harps in literature. The word psaltery, lyre and harp are often confused with one another and both come from the word to pluck a stringed instrument. The best we can hope to do then is note what instruments are depicted in their art and ignore the written record.” Roslyn Rench, The Harp (1969). She also states that the appearance of a column made the advent of the modern harp first appeared in Ross, Scotland in the 8th century.
 * Harbison1992, 4, reference to a High Cross at Clonmacnoise is a reference to this cross carving S2 - David playing his lyre.” Harbison, P. The High Crosses of Ireland, (1992).
 * “However lyres are very different instrument from harps, and it is unlikely that triangular harps evolved out of these lyres.” Graeme Lawson, An Anglo-Saxon harp and lyre of the ninth century, in "Music and Tradition", ed. Widdes and Wolpert, Cambridge 1991,

High Cross at Monasterboice in Co. Louth 923, does show a triangular instrument unfortunately the carving is worn and it is not clear if the strings correspond to a lyre or triangular instrument found in the Pictish examples. The Cross at Monasterboice shows what Harp Historian Joan Rimmer (The Irish　Harp, Mercier, 1977) says appears to be a round-headed lyre. Therefore this triangular instrument is not seen as a valid example. From an Irish perspective Archaeological evidence points more to a lyre as found in the Sutton hoo burial, a harp-lyre they range in date from the fifth through the tenth century in Anglo-Saxon, Classical, Frankish and Celtic cultures. Such instruments were used in the papal harp school in Ireland from the 5th century.

No form of research I have read has ever stated that Pictish instruments were carved at a later date, The standard inclusion in Wikipedia articles is not factuality but verifiable sources and we are not conducting academic research for a journal more writing an encyclopedia. Gaelic carvings only have three or four examples at best when compared to the 12 examples found in Pictish stones. If the three examples in the Palster were influential then why is there no other country, province or society with that many representations (including Rhemes) and why do the majority still use a lyre representing king David with exception of the Picts?.

For balance I suggest a short introduction based on credible data suggesting that triangular stringed instruments were in use, in Ireland and Britain. However data suggests these were lyres rather than Celtic harps. That as far as I can see is how the experts see it. All except one study I have included in the article. Also that the Maedoc book cover be included in the article. Although the majority of the text was moved from the Harp page without my knowledge and didn’t include the Maedoc data. Regards Celtic Harper 00:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I have added a picture of the Maedoc harp to if someone wishes to add a picture of the Trinity college harp please feel free.Celtic Harper 00:35, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've broken the article up into sections and shuffled the text to the section that seemed most appropriate, hopefully without losing any information. I've left the Cleanup tag in place. Trugster 16:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Irish form primary
I think the Irish form is primary. Shouldn't this be moved to Cláirseach? -- Evertype·✆ 20:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I hardly think so. 61000 odd google hits versus 14000 for the Irish spelling demonstrates precisely the opposite I think. I see there is a mention of the variant spelling of Irish origin, so that should be enough. Since even normally extremely Hibernocentric Irish scholars believe the Clàrsach to be of Scottish origin, I don't think that's unfair either (even the famous "Brian Boru harp" was actually from Scotland). I think it's rather random how one Gaelic version dominates over the other, for instance Sídhe is more dominant in English than Sìth. It'd be better if there was a neutral English word, but other than Clarsach (without grave accent) and the rather ugly Shee there isn't one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)


 * I think you'll find its 7650 hits for clarsach, 2610 hits for clairseach and over 121,000 for Irish Harp. Therefore, shouldn't irish harp be the name of this page? 157.190.228.18 (talk) 15:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Irish harp isn't a technical term, and covers so much other than the clarsach ... all the symbol stuff (Leinster flag, coins, etc) and any sentence where Irish and harp are next to each other. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 15:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The Irish harp is not a standard term, therfore I disagree and we retain the original name Celtic Harper (talk) 15:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

A very important point here is whether Wikipedia should fulfil a function of correcting people's misapprehensions and misusages. Without employing lexical forms from the Gaelic language, the term 'Gaelic harp' is, on academic grounds, by far the most precise term usable to denote the harp produced and practised upon by the Gaels of Ireland and Scotland. First of all, the instrument is a harp, not a lyre, and secondly, it derives its identity primarily and ultimately from the context of Gaelic culture. In Gaelic, the word 'clàirseach' means any kind of harp from anywhere, not specifically the Gaelic harp, and therefore should not be primary in my view. 'Celtic harp', covering the Welsh and Breton heritage, is too wide a definition, while the word 'Irish' in the term 'Irish harp' does not accurately describe what is also a cultural artefact of Scottish Gaeldom, particularly since the geographical origin of the instrument is not certain. I propose that the Wikipedia community take its informative role seriously and understand the importance of accuracy and disambiguation. All articles in English pertaining to this instrument should be directed to an article which would have a heading of some clarity and authority, ie, 'Gaelic harp'. It is to be noted that 'Gaelic harp' is a direct English translation of the term in use in the Gaelic language for the same instrument, ie 'clàirseach Ghàidhealach', which is used in Gaelic in opposition to terms for harps from other cultures, eg 'clàirseach Spàinnteach' (Spanish harp). The number of hits for 'Celtic harp' or 'Irish harp' or 'clarsach' should be irrelevant if Wikipedia were to be interested in correcting misapprehensions and misusages and promoting the use of more meaningful and accurate language on this topic, as the purpose of redirecting would be partly to indicate which term is the most reliable.

Ultimately, the only real contender against the term 'Gaelic harp' is 'early Gaelic harp', but these clearly appears to denote a subdivision of concept, implying a 'late Gaelic harp' or at least a 'modern Gaelic harp'. The advantage of the term Gaelic harp is that it is not too wide in scope (as per 'clàirseach' or 'Celtic harp') and not too narrow (as per 'early Gaelic harp' or 'Irish harp'). I would like to point out that I am a Gaelic speaker and feel that native understanding of these matters should be given due weight even though these articles are written in English.


 * Well put, page should be moved to Gaelic harp. 188.141.61.64 (talk) 20:41, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd like to know the name of the person who proposed this. -- Evertype·✆ 22:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

ALAN STIVELL'S WORK FORGOTTEN?
the name of Alan Stivell is not evocated at all. Is the author of the article so young that neither his name neither "Renaissance of the Celtic Harp" album or his general musical and promotting work mean nothing to him or her? Please repair this. It would be nice to quote also the accepted name of "Celtic Harp". 81.48.173.109 (talk) 14:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.225.35 (talk) 00:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Accepted by whom? As a Gaelic speaker and musician, I can confirm the dislike of the term Celtic harp amongst the natives and is far from being the accepted term in Scotland and Ireland amongst proponents of the instrument and Gaelic speakers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.168.34 (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

"Morbhan Republic" nonsense
Keep this fictional nonsense out of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.213.239.24 (talk) 06:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Lots of unreferenced content, original research and ads
As much as they may be pleasant fairy tales to read, the first two sections are totally unreferenced -and totally questionable-. Please let's be aware that this is an encyclopaedia, and that publishing opinionated ideas is not appropriate. The same goes for the advertisement of an obscure School and for a list of CDs from the School tutors in the "Revival" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.4.60 (talk) 23:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Self publishing and advertising
I sadly note that 40% of the references come from earlygaelicharp.info, a non-academic self-published source, and that the article ends with the advert of a self-published CD by earlyaelicharp.info's author and publisher, defined "important" alongside other two, for a total of 3 (three) CDs out of the large existing discography. And a further reference to www.irishharp.org links the 3 authors together. Not good. Really not good. 86.186.176.98 (talk) 07:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Unreferenced part removal
Though it is often suggested[who?] that the British monarchy is the prime reason for the instrument's decline[dubious – discuss], it could be argued that (with several other instruments of the time) it went out of fashion as the baroque era advanced and musical tastes changed[original research?].

I am inclined to look at this part of the entry with much scepticism. There are no references anywhere and what music survives of the harpers shows otherwise to the latter statement. Notably, remaining Irish harpers adopting the baroque style to please their patrons. British monarchy was no doubt a factor, but I am not inclined to speculate on the issue deeply nor do I have any references that could be useful here. The entry is best suited without this paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.122.64.19 (talk) 14:49, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Additions and changes
I have rewritten much of this article, adding references. I have also added new sections to establish the clàrsach in a specifically Scottish setting. The Scottish and Irish wire-strung harps belong, of course, to a common tradition, but the clàrsach does have a history of its own, coloured by a social and cultural environment which differed from that of Ireland. A separate article should be prepared for the Irish cláirseach. Colin Ryan (talk) 10:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Why is it called a 'Celtic' harp?
I don't understand the basis for the term. Can anyone explain it? Fergananim (talk) 11:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know exactly why it's called that, but I know it is called that, and it's clearly never called the "Irish and British Harp". Presumably the "Celtic" name comes from the fact that it was used in the Celtic countries.--Cúchullain t/ c 13:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edits are not an improvement. For one thing, Wikipedia articles are about things, not names, so it's "the Celtic harp is...", not "the Celtic harp is the modern English name of..." You also inserted a claim that the harp was known by local Celtic names "till about the mid-19th century", which you contradict later by saying "It remains known by these names among Gaelic and Brythonic speakers". The one source you gave, a website for the Historical Harp Society of Ireland, doesn't verify any of the material you added. I didn't see the benefit in the rest of the material you added, so I just reverted. Please do not re-add this material without discussion.--Cúchullain t/ c 18:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Cuchullain, could you at least ask why I made such edits in the first place before reverting them? In short 1 - the harp was known by these names among Gaelic-speaking and Brythonic-speaking communities because that was indeed their name for it, as it remains among their (much diminished) linguistic communities. There is no contradiction between the two statements; it reflects massive language shift, which is why the new name, Celtic harp (an English term) became used. If you have any other questions about why I made particular edits, please ask. That way they might be better understood, and less open to such quick reverts. Is mise, Fergananim (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * At this stage, I'd much prefer you explain what you're trying to do here before you make such large edits. Your comment above seems to be your original research and it's certainly not backed up by the one source you added. I doubt any source would say that the term "cláirseach" was the common name in Ireland until "about the mid-19th century", as one example. The article needs a lot of work - for instance it doesn't explain the difference between Irish and Welsh harps - but your edits just confused the matter even further.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:02, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Celtic harp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090209043451/http://www.calumcille.com:80/ to http://www.calumcille.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120331194201/http://adventuresinmusic.biz/Archives/Interviews/celticharp.htm to http://adventuresinmusic.biz/Archives/Interviews/celticharp.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Merge from Clàrsach
This long-standing merge proposal doesn't seem to have been commented on, so I'll start. A review of the history shows that the current Celtic harp page began under the Name Clàrsach back in 2006, which was then moved the english language term in December 2013. One year later, in December 2014, a section from Harp was moved over to Clàrsach, forming the basis for a new page. The merge then seems to have been partially tagged and then ignored. My view is that regional variations (telenn in Breton, cláirseach in Irish, clàrsach in Scottish Gaelic and telyn in Welsh) are best discussed together on one page. The choice of title should in general be the english language term (WP:NAME), and this does avoid the problem of agreeing amongst telenn, cláirseach, clàrsach and telyn. I also note that Clàrsach has considerable overlap already with Celtic harp, including historical and modern use. So, on balance, merge. Klbrain (talk) 16:44, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Music and Dance of the Gael
— Assignment last updated by CBFraoch (talk) 17:12, 24 November 2023 (UTC)


 * These additions look pretty good to me. I think it all fit well in the article. Cameronmac1 (talk) 21:25, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Charateristic and Function
I would suggest a change to various parts of this section because I think that important details have been missed; mostly small changes to the lead section and overall detail. Some key points are the more information on when metal strings (as far back as we know) were in the majority of use on the clàrsach. As well as, what the rest of the harp strings in Europe were made out of at the time. Also, another addition would be, clarification on what part of/ how they are played with the nails. Finally, this concludes my known additions, thus far, which will be implemented at the end of the week. Thanks! Uilleam1 (talk) 18:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)