Persian and Ottoman maces

[estcrh]

Two maces from the Met, one is said to be Persian, the other Ottoman...but can we be sure, the Met has been wrong before.

[Kubur]

Well based on the design, I'll say that they are right.

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Well based on the design, I'll say that they are right.

So what are the main characteristics to look for to differentiate between them? My admittedly very shallow observations suggest that Persian maces might have an emphasis on flanges used to penerate armour, whilst Ottoman maces have "turban" like, rounded heads? But this may be coincidental and completely wrong.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by Victrix

So what are the main characteristics to look for to differentiate between them? My admittedly very shallow observations suggest that Persian maces might have an emphasis on flanges used to penerate armour, whilst Ottoman maces have "turban" like, rounded heads? But this may be coincidental and completely wrong.

Well it might be a little bit wrong as a lot of Ottoman maces are winged maces.
Ottoman maces influenced Central european maces. They were very similar.
I suspect the turban like or ognion shaped like maces to be more for prestige than for war. I might be wrong... I wonder if they are heavy or not...



Here two threads on this topic that i found on the forum

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=ottoman+mace

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=ottoman+mace

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Well it might be a little bit wrong as a lot of Ottoman maces are winged maces.
Ottoman maces influenced Central european maces. They were very similar.
I suspect the turban like or ognion shaped like maces to be more for prestige than for war. I might be wrong... I wonder if they are heavy or not...



Here two threads on this topic that i found on the forum

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=ottoman+mace

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=ottoman+mace

Yes there was a lot of cultural exchange, especially with regards to weapons technology. I guess the Ottoman Empire was quite multi-ethnic and its army must have been quite a sight to behold on campaigns. The soldiers in the prints at the beginning of this thread look Mongol in appearance which may be a coincidence, but I think I read somewhere that Persia used Turkish warriors as mercenaries? I got to handle what was described as an 18thC probably Hungarian horseman's mace at an auction (see pic below). It looked more like a prestige object, but was heavy to hold and seemed to be made of solid bronze or brass. Interestingly, the shaft was bent as if it had indeed been used in anger. Many thanks for the links.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Victrix

So what are the main characteristics to look for to differentiate between them? My admittedly very shallow observations suggest that Persian maces might have an emphasis on flanges used to penerate armour, whilst Ottoman maces have "turban" like, rounded heads? But this may be coincidental and completely wrong.

Where do we get our info on which maces are Persian and which are Ottoman in the first place?? From museums which are often wrong, from auctions which are often wrong, from books which are often wrong and period illustrations which we would assume would be correct (hopefully).

Below is George Stones "maces" and descriptions, an early source for many collectors, dealers and museums.

The whole bottom row is Indian which leaves quite a few on the first and second rows as being "Persian", disregard the bulls headed maces which we already know as being Persian.

[Kubur]

That's right.
I wonder where the Arabs stand in the picture...
Between Turks, Persians and Indians...
Here an Iraqi gentleman

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Victrix

The soldiers in the prints at the beginning of this thread look Mongol in appearance which may be a coincidence, but I think I read somewhere that Persia used Turkish warriors as mercenaries?

Mongol, I do not see that myself, but these types of period illustrations do show us some interesting armor, weapons, clothing etc.

"Zal Slays Khazarvan", Folio 104r from the Shahnama (Book of Kings) of Shah Tahmasp

Author:Abu'l Qasim Firdausi (935–1020)
Artist:Painting attributed to 'Abd al-Vahhab
Workshop director:Mir Musavvir (active 1525–60)
Object Name:Folio from an illustrated manuscript
Date:ca. 1525–30
Geography:Made in Iran, Tabriz
Medium:Opaque watercolor, ink, silver, and gold on paper
Dimensions:Painting: H. 11 1/16 in. (28.1 cm) W. 7 3/16 in. (18.3 cm) Page: H. 18 9/16 in. (47.1 cm) W. 12 7/16 in. (31.6 cm) Mat: H. 22 in. (55.9 cm) W. 16 in. (40.6 cm)

"While Afrasiyab fights at Dahistan, a supplementary force is detailed to attack Zabul, home of Zal, of which Mihrab has been left in charge. Through bribery and persuasion, he keeps the Turanians at bay. An urgent message reaches Zal, who returns immediately with his army. He soon dispatches Khazarvan, one of the Turanian commanders, by smashing him on the head with his ox-head mace, then trampling him to death."

("During the Safavid era, following the common geographical convention of the Shahnameh, the term Turan was used to refer to the domain of the Uzbek empire in conflict with the Safavids.")

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Mongol, I do not see that myself, but these types of period illustrations do show us some interesting armor, weapons, clothing etc.

"Zal Slays Khazarvan", Folio 104r from the Shahnama (Book of Kings) of Shah Tahmasp

Author:Abu'l Qasim Firdausi (935–1020)
Artist:Painting attributed to 'Abd al-Vahhab
Workshop director:Mir Musavvir (active 1525–60)
Object Name:Folio from an illustrated manuscript
Date:ca. 1525–30
Geography:Made in Iran, Tabriz
Medium:Opaque watercolor, ink, silver, and gold on paper
Dimensions:Painting: H. 11 1/16 in. (28.1 cm) W. 7 3/16 in. (18.3 cm) Page: H. 18 9/16 in. (47.1 cm) W. 12 7/16 in. (31.6 cm) Mat: H. 22 in. (55.9 cm) W. 16 in. (40.6 cm)

"While Afrasiyab fights at Dahistan, a supplementary force is detailed to attack Zabul, home of Zal, of which Mihrab has been left in charge. Through bribery and persuasion, he keeps the Turanians at bay. An urgent message reaches Zal, who returns immediately with his army. He soon dispatches Khazarvan, one of the Turanian commanders, by smashing him on the head with his ox-head mace, then trampling him to death."

("During the Safavid era, following the common geographical convention of the Shahnameh, the term Turan was used to refer to the domain of the Uzbek empire in conflict with the Safavids.")

Yes, these are fantastic pictures with great detail and personality. It may be my imagination, but if you look closely at the faces of the warriors in the last picture you posted near the top of this thread, you will find that they look almost Chinese. The sabres and bows with quivers reinforce the Mongol look in my mind. This does not seem a coincidence as Turan and Uzbeks have Mongol influences at least. I guess the larger the Empires, the more diverse the people within them, and the greater the cross-pollination of cultures in terms of equipment (including weapons and armour), dress, architecture, cuisine, etc.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Well it might be a little bit wrong as a lot of Ottoman maces are winged maces. Ottoman maces influenced Central european maces. They were very similar.I suspect the turban like or onion shaped like maces to be more for prestige than for war. I might be wrong... I wonder if they are heavy or not...

I think if we identify the maces that are likely to be Persian in style and design the remaining examples can be said for the most part to be Ottoman, the Indian examples are usually easy to Identify. As for the "onion" type round maces...I have nor held one, I asked the seller of one if his was solid, he said it was not. They could have a wood core with a metal exterior, I have seen dented examples but being made hollow would not make any sense except it they were strictly for show.

That being said, I have seen a couple of smooth, round maces which appeared to be solid and I have seen and held one that was solid, very heavy and it would have been a deadly weapon for sure, supposedly Indian but hard to tell on this example. Pictured below.