>Right, and when the same historians talk about things >"classical" they are >talking about things roughly 2500 years old
Earth to Stuart.....earth to Stuart... are you there Stuart...hello! hello! I think we lost him sir........ Michael Thames www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stuart LeBlanc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lutelist" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 7:06 PM Subject: RE: French Lutenist about to release a worldwide first- the Book of Perrine > > Right, and when the same historians talk about things "classical" they are > talking about things roughly 2500 years old. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Allen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:58 PM > To: Lutelist > Subject: Re: French Lutenist about to release a worldwide first- the > Book of Perrine > > > At a guess I'd have to say that when a person who studies Renaissance and > Medieval music calls a thing modern, 200 easily falls into that category. It's > not an insult, just a fact of the thing being only 200 vs. 400 or more years > old. Historians also often tend to call anything younger than the English > Renaissance "modern". > > > Michael wrote: > > > > Thomas, I usually see your logic, and agree with almost all of your > >comments. However to call a system of guitar notation that has been around, > >for 200 years, and used by the foremost guitar composers of the past and > >present, a " relatively modern invention" your sense of the passage of time > >is allot different than mine, what kind of sweetener are you using in you > >coffee thesedays? I'd like to try some too! > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
