Persian and Ottoman maces

[Kubur]

Hi Guys,

How do you identify a Persian from an Ottoman war mace?
I don't want to mention Indian maces because it's another topic.
Plus Indian maces are quite common compare to Persian and Ottoman ones...

Thanks
Kubur

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Hi Guys,

How do you identify a Persian from an Ottoman war mace?
I don't want to mention Indian maces because it's another topic.
Plus Indian maces are quite common compare to Persian and Ottoman ones...

Thanks
Kubur

If the descriptions from auctions, museums and private sales etc are correct, Persian maces are much rarer than Ottoman maces. From what I have seen the mace on the left is Persian.

As far as Indian maces go, really old Indian maces are quite rare.

[estcrh]

A group of Ottoman maces and what is said to be a Persian mace. I think that really old Persian maces and really old ottoman maces may be hard to tell apart in some cases, with the exception of Persian bull headed maces.

Persian flanged mace, Safavid period, Late 15th-early 16th century. Very rarely encountered, the elongated head with button finial and six heavy flanges with spurred terminals and stepped base, the solid steel haft forged in one piece with the head. Representing the formal descendent of bronze flanged maces in use between the 11th-14th century. Overall length 69.9 cm.

[Kubur]

Thank you for your reponse my friend
Well i might have found one that i'll post later.

Best,
Kubur

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Thank you for your reponse my friend
Well i might have found one that i'll post later.

Best,
Kubur

Waiting......in the mean time, here are a few images of Persian maces from from the "Shahnama" (Book of Kings) of Shah Tahmasp Author: Abu'l Qasim Firdausi (935–1020) Artist: Painting attributed to Mir Musavvir (active 1525–60) Artist: Painting attributed to Qasim ibn 'Ali (active ca. 1525–60). Folio from an illustrated manuscript. Date: ca. 1525–30, Iran, Tabriz, Met Museum.

One of the images shows a mace being carried in the belt of a mounted warrior, the only image of its kind I know of.

[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 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.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Kubur

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

Kuber, that mace is described as being made from stone, here is another example that is outside of the norm, a spiked wooden mace. Both are very rare period photos of maces.

[estcrh]

Some known ancient Persian mace examples from The Arts of the Muslim Knight
The Furusiyya Art Foundation Collection, by Bashir Mohamed, 2008

Seljuk Maces

The mace without a description......... "Persian mace head, 10th-12th century, bronze, maces were used as cavalry weapons, but were also symbols of power or office. A Shah-nama illustration from around 1340 shows the hero Gudarz surrounded by guards with maces of the same type as this one. Gudarz himself is shown seated holding a mace that ends in a lion’s head, L: 16.5 cm."

[estcrh]

Two known examples of Persian maces and another supposedly Persian type.

[Kubur]

I've seen many Seljuk maces the last years.
I suspect that most of them are fakes like the Chinese bronze swords...
Not the ones that you posted of course.

[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.

[eftihis]

2 maces described as "islamic", 16th, 17th century.

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Two known examples of Persian maces and another supposedly Persian type.

These are simply amazing... Stunning.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by Victrix

These are simply amazing... Stunning.

One is from the British museum
they have also these two...

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Two known examples of Persian maces and another supposedly Persian type.

Salaams estcrh,
I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT #16 ...ONE MACE IN PARTICULAR was interesting and I note what the Met says about that~

Quote "The ox-headed mace is associated with the heroes of the Shahnama (Book of Kings), the poet Firdausi’s epic of pre-Islamic Iran completed in a.d. 1010. The mace reproduces the hero Bahram Gur’s weapon made in memory of the cow that nursed him. An emblem of power and good, it was inherited by other heroes in the epic, notably Feridun and Rustam. This example is representative of the Qajar revival of ancient Iranian imagery. It bears the false signature of a legendary smith, Haji 'Abbas, and the equally spurious date A.H. 951 (A.D. 1544–45)." Unquote.

It occurred to me that it may not be obvious from the Mace Head where it comes from however some clue is apparent in the shaft of the weapon as to provenance... and despite the false date and makers signature.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

The Ottoman Mace.

I note the Term Polylobate Mace... http://www.icollector.com/AN-OTTOMAN-MACE_i21581002 described and sold as

Quote"The rare, mid-16th century steel head of polylobate form, refitted to a leather-covered wooden haft with silver mounts. Late 17th century. Worn overall. Such maces were popular with Ottoman, Polish, Cossack and Tatar warriors, representing a symbol of rank as well as a weapon. Overall length 45.5 cm.
Condition II" Unquote.

Whilst it remains understandably difficult to separate Ottoman and Persian hafts with heavy weighted lumps on the end...perhaps there is some distinction in the way these hafts were decorated. The Ottoman type also covered in part by leather...Clearly the concept of badge of office was mirrored in both weapons and in the Parade nature in the Persian form in the Qajar Dynasty.

Below~ The Polylobate Ottoman Mace and to the right another ....

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Naturally Maces were not the sole domain of one or two armies .. Eventually they spread far and wide as described below from this excellent resource ~

http://otlichnik.tripod.com/medmace3.html

Quote" Flanged mace heads are common throughout the northern Islamic world, in Persian and Turkic dominated areas from the 12th century on. It is possible that the popularity, if not the actual design, of flanged maces spread into Western Europe through contacts forged during the crusades - in particular contacts with the Seljuk Turks. Flanged maces were known in ancient times in the Iranian lands and the design may have survived in these parts through the “dark ages”." Unquote.

And that makes telling the difference between Flanged Maces very difficult indeed !!

Below the caption described these as Indo Persian Maces... which to the non specialist is equally confusing . Maces are best looked at singly and as they appear viewing any script or typical haft decoration and by a process of elimination and having gone through the different heads.. Flanged, Round, Polylobate, Spiked, Zoomorphic..etc.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Below the caption described these as Indo Persian Maces... which to the non specialist is equally confusing .

Ibrahimm, that image also contains individual descriptions.

Various Indo-Persian maces, from left: Bozdogan/buzdygan (Ottoman), tabar-shishpar (Indian), shishpar (Indian), shishpar (unknown), gurz (Indian), shishpar (Indian).

Describing items as "Indo-Persian" is no different than when you have maces from Europe and you say "European" maces. Indo-Persian is just a way to group items together, it is an internet tag word that is picked up by search engines. It is very helpful when searching online.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Ibrahimm, that image also contains individual descriptions.




Describing items as "Indo-Persian" is no different than when you have maces from Europe and you say "European" maces. Indo-Persian is just a way to group items together, it is an internet tag word that is picked up by search engines. It is very helpful when searching online.

Salaams estcrh, I don't have an axe to grind with Maces in fact its an excellent thread... I also don't want to get wound up in the wording used by the web although it can be seen that Indo/ Persian rather haphazardly groups a huge selection of everything weapon wise in one bag.
Was it not one of the aims of this thread to separate the Maces so that they could be further identified and to expand on the subject it was mentioned at #1 that Indian weapons were also in the conundrum...? Which indeed by definition of Indo/ Persian they certainly are.

Thus, I think an appraisal of each style would have been the way forward.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Thus, I think an appraisal of each style would have been the way forward.

Ibrahiim, I agree with you but there are really not many mace examples that can be positively identified as being Persian. We know that the bulls head and devils head maces are Persian, and some maces have known Persian carvings / decorations but the rest do not seen to have anything that helps distinguish between Ottoman and Persian as far as I can see other than certain styles of flanged and smooth maces which have been identified as being Persian due to similarity in form to older known examples and the lack of similar Ottoman maces made in the same style.

Below is a good study example, there are a few maces that I know of made in this style. They seem to have been forged from one piece of iron / steel, flanged with embedded bead type decorations, this one I have in my collection....I always have thought it might be Ottoman, but now I an thinking that it may possible be Persian as I have not seen any known Ottoman maces with similar decorations. Any thoughts????

[estcrh]

A few other example of the same type.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams estcrh, That mace form appears at #25 on left of photo with other Indo Persian examples...but identified as Bozdogan/buzdygan (Ottoman) which generally means round headed mace.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.