Talk:Egardus

Not a stub
Please don't autolabel this a "stub" -- this is really all the information that exists about him. --Myke Cuthbert 03:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary and explaination
I just made an edit summary which I now realize could be read as snarky ("Just because it's on the web doesn't mean it's true!") but I meant it with a wink and a chuckle, mainly because I was surprised that even an obsolete piece of information about Egardus could be found! As the article now explains, we used to think that lots of composers associated with one section of the manuscript Mod A were also to be associated with the Pisan (Bolognese) schismatic court. Egardus is in that section, hence (as the 1944-45 argument goes) he was probably there. Now we have the records of the court, more detailed studies of Mod A, etc., and this theory doesn't have nearly as much currency. Best, -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 22:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Good article on hold
I'm putting this on hold for now. Its comprehensive (especially for such an obscure figure) and well-written, but it could use a few more inline citation. Specifically, I'd pass it if these are cited:


 * ''His name, a copy of one of his works in a Flemish manuscript, and a possible citation of his music by Thomas Fabri, all suggest a Northern origin.


 * ''The most important biographical research on the composer was conducted by Reinhard Strohm, who notes that it was more common for Northern works (and composers) to travel to Italy than the opposite.


 * ''Strohm also finds connections to a work by Thomas Fabri in the text of Furnos reliquisti (see below), an unlikely coincidence if they were not working in close proximity to each other.


 * Johannes Egardus held chaplaincies in Dixmuide and Bruges.

I notice that the author of one of the cited works is the primary editor, so this shouldn't be to hard. Leave me a note on my talk page and I'll pass it. Good work; I really like articles on obscure historical figures. Atropos 04:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Passed Atropos 18:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

New attribution -- but not in RS yet...
The line in the text:


 * In the Warsaw source, the work is labeled "Opus Egardi." In Mod A, "Egardus" is used.  In no other source of this work is there an attribution.

is now no longer accurate -- the source in Padua Ba 2.2.a contains an attribution legible under ultraviolet light. But this is new original research and thus shouldn't be added to the article until I've published it somewhere unless the community decides they want to make an exemption under the last paragraph of UGC. But I figured I should post it here in advance of publication in case anyone cares enough to dig this far. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 00:33, 11 August 2013 (UTC)