OTTOMAN....What do we mean?

Emanuel · 23rd November 2015, 11:49 PM

A bit tricky since Ottoman refers to a culture, a political entity, and the time that that entity was in power.

I agree with Ariel and others here that since it is very difficult to closely identify some objects or parts of objects to specific items and places, the more vague but correct identification as "Ottoman" is acceptable.

With many weapons, the blades were produced in one part of the Ottoman sphere at some time, and decorations/fittings were added in other parts at other times. Some daggers, guns, sabres and yataghan can be called Balkan sometimes, but they may have parts produced in what is now modern Turney. Parts of modern Turkey itself are now in "the Balkans".

Even when some objects were entirely produced in parts of Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary or Albania, they were fully derived from the influence of the dominant Ottoman culture.

Unless we can provide backup with a high degree of confidence to say that an object was produced in Foça, or Sarajevo, or maybe Ioannina, all we can say is that it is Ottoman, from this or that century. That just means it was produced in the Ottoman cultural and/or political sphere of influence.

I think we can qualify these objects as a Greek yataghan, or Bulgarian kilij, without calling them Ottoman, because the terms "yataghan" and "kilij" already carry the association with the Ottoman culture.

Emanuel

Kubur · 24th November 2015, 11:02 AM

Very well written and I fully agree with Manu!

kahnjar1 · 24th November 2015, 07:49 PM

I also agree with Manu, but the key to what I was trying to clarify lies in his last paragraph.
We can not IMHO simply classify EVERYTHING which comes from the area of the old Ottoman Empire as Ottoman, if the question is being asked as to ORIGIN......in other words "Where is this FROM"
Stu

ariel · 25th November 2015, 02:50 AM

In many cases, the only answer would be" Somewhere in the Ottoman Empire, but where exactly, - I have no bloody idea. Sorry.....":-)

But do not despair: only 15 or so years ago we had vicious and unproductive battles on the origin of ( what became clear later) Laz Bichaq:-)
And only 5 years ago or so, we had no idea that the unusually long and simple yataghans with a T-handle were Zeibek.

In another 50 or so years we shall confidently distinguish yataghans from Ioannina from those of Plovdiv manufacture. Then we shall start working on kilijes:-)))

rickystl · 26th November 2015, 05:32 PM

Hi Stu.
Well. Now look what you've done. You've opened up a can of worms. And Indo-Persian would probably be a two cans of worms. LOL!!

Seriously, good question. And thanks to all that posted. The responses above to your original question are all much better than I can produce. Great Thread and interesting reading.
Rick.

kahnjar1 · 26th November 2015, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickystl

Hi Stu.
Well. Now look what you've done. You've opened up a can of worms. And Indo-Persian would probably be a two cans of worms. LOL!!

Seriously, good question. And thanks to all that posted. The responses above to your original question are all much better than I can produce. Great Thread and interesting reading.
Rick.

Thanks Rick

ariel · 27th November 2015, 03:16 PM

The confusion about this term is not unique.
After all, Ottoman implies Turkish Royal dynasty. It was in control for ~ 700 years and ruled over tribes of different ethnic and geographical origins.

In this sense it is not much different from our usage of Qajar swords, Ming vases or Tzarist Russian Shashkas. All objects from these groups could have been made in different times and different localities. Napoleonic swords are even more ambiguous: we imply era, but lump together French, German and British swords. Luckily, for them we have readable inscriptions and well-known patterns; those are as a rule unavailable on Ottoman weapons.

To sum up, we use the term "Ottoman" not because it is the best one, but simply because there is no more precise attribution.

estcrh · 28th November 2015, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickystl

Hi Stu.
Well. Now look what you've done. You've opened up a can of worms. And Indo-Persian would probably be a two cans of worms. LOL!!

"Indo-Persian" just takes all of the other umbrella terms such as "Ottoman", "Middle Eastern", "Oriental", Islamic", "Indian", "Persian", "Iranian" etc and puts them into one large umbrella category. I can remember a few years back when you still could barely find images of common arms and armor, let alone rare types, now there is a varitable buffet of images to see (and learn from), just a few search terms finds the majority of them...how nice!!

Indo-Persian weapons.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Indo...w=1918&bih=995

Indo-Persian armor.
https://www.google.com/search?q=indo...w=1918&bih=995

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

23rd November 2015, 11:49 PM	#1
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	A bit tricky since Ottoman refers to a culture, a political entity, and the time that that entity was in power. I agree with Ariel and others here that since it is very difficult to closely identify some objects or parts of objects to specific items and places, the more vague but correct identification as "Ottoman" is acceptable. With many weapons, the blades were produced in one part of the Ottoman sphere at some time, and decorations/fittings were added in other parts at other times. Some daggers, guns, sabres and yataghan can be called Balkan sometimes, but they may have parts produced in what is now modern Turney. Parts of modern Turkey itself are now in "the Balkans". Even when some objects were entirely produced in parts of Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary or Albania, they were fully derived from the influence of the dominant Ottoman culture. Unless we can provide backup with a high degree of confidence to say that an object was produced in Foça, or Sarajevo, or maybe Ioannina, all we can say is that it is Ottoman, from this or that century. That just means it was produced in the Ottoman cultural and/or political sphere of influence. I think we can qualify these objects as a Greek yataghan, or Bulgarian kilij, without calling them Ottoman, because the terms "yataghan" and "kilij" already carry the association with the Ottoman culture. Emanuel

24th November 2015, 11:02 AM	#2
Kubur Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,145	Very well written and I fully agree with Manu!

24th November 2015, 07:49 PM	#3
kahnjar1 Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND Posts: 2,818	I also agree with Manu, but the key to what I was trying to clarify lies in his last paragraph. We can not IMHO simply classify EVERYTHING which comes from the area of the old Ottoman Empire as Ottoman, if the question is being asked as to ORIGIN......in other words "Where is this FROM" Stu

25th November 2015, 02:50 AM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	In many cases, the only answer would be" Somewhere in the Ottoman Empire, but where exactly, - I have no bloody idea. Sorry.....":-) But do not despair: only 15 or so years ago we had vicious and unproductive battles on the origin of ( what became clear later) Laz Bichaq:-) And only 5 years ago or so, we had no idea that the unusually long and simple yataghans with a T-handle were Zeibek. In another 50 or so years we shall confidently distinguish yataghans from Ioannina from those of Plovdiv manufacture. Then we shall start working on kilijes:-)))

26th November 2015, 05:32 PM	#5
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,633	Hi Stu. Well. Now look what you've done. You've opened up a can of worms. And Indo-Persian would probably be a two cans of worms. LOL!! Seriously, good question. And thanks to all that posted. The responses above to your original question are all much better than I can produce. Great Thread and interesting reading. Rick.

27th November 2015, 03:16 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	The confusion about this term is not unique. After all, Ottoman implies Turkish Royal dynasty. It was in control for ~ 700 years and ruled over tribes of different ethnic and geographical origins. In this sense it is not much different from our usage of Qajar swords, Ming vases or Tzarist Russian Shashkas. All objects from these groups could have been made in different times and different localities. Napoleonic swords are even more ambiguous: we imply era, but lump together French, German and British swords. Luckily, for them we have readable inscriptions and well-known patterns; those are as a rule unavailable on Ottoman weapons. To sum up, we use the term "Ottoman" not because it is the best one, but simply because there is no more precise attribution.