![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
![]() Quote:
1299 - 1923 AD. It's not short to me. But I agree with you, we learn from our mistakes. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 2,793
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,366
|
![]()
I recall a query where a guy asked what 'Byzantine swords' were like.
Imagine trying to respond to that one. I was once told that 'weapons have no geographic boundaries'. Naturally that pretty much applies to many things, but obviously such objects transcend such restrictions. Often in the study of Indian arms, items are classified as 'Deccani'. This term of course describes topographically the plateau of Central India and includes various geographic boundaries. However, the term may denote more of a cultural or tribal character of a weapon. But then, the complex dynamics of these aspects are altered by the futility of establishing a reasonable period with traditional forms in use for centuries. Then throw in commemorative and revival forms. Collectors use many 'buzz' words in their desperation to have catchy classifications and denominators in their descriptions of weapons, and most seem to shy away from any sort of extra wording in qualification, so we end up with these 'broadly' described items. As noted, there is no 'right' or 'wrong', or correct manner of classification, just reasonable effort to be accurate and avoid deception. Also, and again as noted, the influences of various Ottoman features and decoration, if not entire forms, were prevalent in many cultures and regions. It seems that if such provenance or origin can be specified, it should be used over the Ottoman term. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 2,793
|
![]()
Thanks Jim for coming in on this. Your last paragraph I think sums it up nicely.
Stu |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,366
|
![]()
You bet Stu! Couldn't resist adding to this interesting discussion!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
|
![]()
The terms "Ottoman" and "Indo-Persian" are great examples of internet search terms. Without such broad terms it would take a lot longer for people to find what they are looking for. Tagging your posts and or images etc with these and or similar terms is the best way in todays internet driven world for dealers, collectors, Museums etc to have their images, research, etc found.
I have contributed thousands of images to Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, Pinterest, Photobucket, Flicker and various forums and I have found that an image/post/research etc can be publically available for years without ever being seen, and yet a newly available image/post etc can be found all over the internet, the difference being the words used, the same goes for forum discussions. Using the right search term will get your posts/images noticed. Last edited by estcrh; 23rd November 2015 at 05:59 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,666
|
![]()
Interesting topic. Just like you Stu, I have often been frustrated with the vagueness of the term "Ottoman". The most extreme examples of its indiscriminate application are some recent catalogues of arms from the Askeri Museum, where every single item that comes from an area that may have once been part of the Empire, is labeled as "Osmanli" - from tribal Arab khanjars to Albanian tanchika rifles.
On the other hand, there was a large amount of trade between the various provinces of the Ottoman Empire, and that trade included arms, along with their manufacturing techniques and decoration. On top of that, there was a significant movement within the borders of the Empire by various ethnic groups, which brought their weapons and art with them. It certainly makes things more complicated, because as Ariel pointed out, it is often hard or impossible to state with any certainty where a yataghan or a pala may have been made, and the craftsmen very rarely indicated their home towns. I agree that we should strive to learn enough about minor local differences in decoration and construction, to the point where we can attribute arms to a specific province within the Ottoman Empire, if not to a specific manufacturing center, but I do not feel we are quite there yet. Regards, Teodor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 2,793
|
![]() Quote:
My concern, if that is what you want to call it, was the response to a Member asking for origin of a particular item, and hoping to find out where his piece originated. Stu |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|