Talk:Bagpipes

/archive1: up to February 15 2006
/archive2: up to July 24 2007
/archive3: up to Dec 2 2009

Archived

I have archived recent discussions on this page, as most seem to have died off. Please move any back if you feel they are still needing looked at. Calum (talk) 13:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clobberation of the "Terminology and Grammar section"

I suspect "pipists" is an elaborate hoax. If not, please provide a cite both for it and the claim that purists still call pipers pipists (there's a beauty of a tongue-twister in there somewhere...). I have also clobbered the surnames as not being particularly relevant. I don't think anyone reads this article for the surnames. Calum (talk) 13:55, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great Article

The history section is deep. Well Done..--Oracleofottawa (talk) 03:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another early source

I have another (possible) early source. The Mishna (basic part of the Talmud, redacted c.200 in Israel), refers to an instrument called a chemet challilin, literally a water-skin of flutes. The commentators generally presumt this to be a bagpipe, and this is the word in moden Hebrew. Seems to me this is at least as good as the other source, unless someone know of some other instrument that could meet such a description. (Interestingly, the commentator Tosafot Yom Tov (c.1700) mentions they they were common is Russia in his day (he calls it a sackfife in German.)

Any comments? I would like to put in the basic statement from the Mishna.--93.172.150.67 (talk) 21:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That still seems to fall into the category of "interesting theory, but by no means conclusive." There are tons of vague descriptions in old Latin, Greek and Hebrew texts that people think apply to bagpipes, but I'm not aware of any true authority on organology who seriously believes those. It seems to always be linguists with minimal musical experience and an interest in novelty who push the "bagpipes were used in ancient times" line. Given the lack of iconographic evidence (despite tons of iconographic evidence for other ancient instruments), I'd be leery of putting it into the article. To the best of my knowledge, there is little to no visual evidence of bagpipes until the 1200s or so, after which point they appear all over the place in all kinds of artwork. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks for the warning. Any idea what it might be? A Chemet is a bag made by skinning an animal whole, and a challil is generally assumed to be a flute. I had just thought it was at least as conclusive as the other example given.--62.219.96.219 (talk) 13:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]