Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 27th November 2015, 09:14 PM   #36
Kubur
Member
 
Kubur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
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.
I agree also and to sum up:
Is it the chicken who invented the egg or the egg who invented the chicken?
Kubur is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.