cold weapons and Orientalism

gp · 10th July 2020, 12:09 PM

Orientalism in art was a fashionable perception and hence subjective "imitation" of the reality and nothing to do with the scientific studies of the likes of T.E. Lawrence and Gertrude Bell and departments of universities we have knowadays.

Neverthelss some paintings can be interesting as an additional visualisation of certain items.

Like this painting from 1900 called "The Nubian Guard" by the Austrian / Habsburg painter Ludwig Deutsch

Question I have is;

- did the painter use his artistic freedom and incorporate items he collected
( which he was known for and also something Rembrand also did...)
- or weapons he saw during his travels in Egypt?
- or got inspired by paintings from fellow painters
(f.i. "the Bash Bazouks by Paja Jovanovic) ?

Looking at this painting, the yataghan does look to me like an Ottoman Bosnian one based upon the look of the hilt decorated with the coral stones, the scabbard partially covered in a red velvet-like cloth (similar to a yataghan I have from the "Bosniaken" Inf. Reg. period 1882-1916).
But then again I do not know how yataghans and bichaqs looked in Egypt between 1880-1900....

So what do you guys think is the origin of this yataghsan ?

kahnjar1 · 14th July 2020, 03:58 AM

I can not comment on the Yataghan but the item worn beside it in the first 2 pics, is definitely a Dharia dagger from Hijaz region of modern day Saudi Arabia. I have no idea on the lance/spear he is carrying. The right hand pic is not the same as the other 2 as the knife by the Yataghan is different and the clothing colour is also not the same. Also the pistol has a ball butt whereas the ones in the other pics do not.
It would appear to me that there is quite a regional mixture of weapons here and some editing of the pics also.
Stu

kronckew · 14th July 2020, 04:59 AM

Popular paintings were often copied by the original painter, frequently by their students or employees assigned to such tasks so more people could own a copy. They were frequently signed by the original artist as a stamp of approval, and often contained slight variations. As You note Rembrandt, he was a one who did this. They had quite a production line I've read. A renaissance version of the photo-copy.

ariel · 18th July 2020, 12:34 AM

On top of that, oils were not painted "on the spot".
Painters made more or less detailed sketches with the live models, but painted the final drafts in their studios in Europe. It would be virtually impossible to convince some Nubian guard to pose immobile for several hours day after day, to account for the changes in daylight etc. In their studios they had collections of oriental things, including weapons, and just selected the flashiest examples from the hoard.
Thus, the weapons in the finished painting had nothing to do with the real stuff. By the same token, the dresses, their colors etc were painted according to the painters' artistic whims.

And I am not even talking about orientalist painters being allowed to visit harems and see naked wives of local honchos dancing or taking a bath:-)

Jim McDougall · 18th July 2020, 04:09 AM

This is an excellent and well posed question!
I very much agree with the previous entries, and 'orientalism' was a romantic fascination with exotica popular in art and literature. As noted, Rembrandt had quite a collection of arms and armor and used modern (of the time) weapons such as keris in his 'Biblical works to add to artistic effect and drama.

As also noted, various weapons, costume and figures were drawn in 'studies' where they were later compiled collectively in a finished work. It is well known that items, features, even characters were taken from other extant works to include in the artists portrayal. I have seen numbers of cases where works were shown in comparison to other works the elements have been taken from.

In the Ottoman situation, it is tempting to note the remarkable diversity of their forces and to consider that a subject figure might have weapons from the many sources of arms coming together in such context. While possible, it was not necessarily the case, nor certainly the norm, so it is more likely the items portrayed here are essentially 'license' in my opinion.

Philip · 22nd July 2020, 05:31 AM

These Orientalist paintings are wonderful, artists like Schreier and Gérôme could really evoke a romantic mood of an idealized East, almost wish you could be there despite the sandstorms, broiling heat, and occasionally being kicked by an irate camel.

But for reasons already cited, this art is NOT a reliable ethnographic reference source! Any more than we can rely on Hollywood to depict history anywhere near what it actually was, or would have been.

Photos are a more certain bet, but not necessarily so. Some photographers set up their shots with local models appropriately tarted up and equipped. You have to look carefully at the details. And it's best to delve into the historical backstory of the place and era, and have a certain familiarity with other aspects of the material culture of that particular civilization -- that way if you find anomalies, you can apply a bit of analysis and decide for yourself.

10th July 2020, 12:09 PM	#1
gp Member Join Date: May 2020 Posts: 717	cold weapons and Orientalism Orientalism in art was a fashionable perception and hence subjective "imitation" of the reality and nothing to do with the scientific studies of the likes of T.E. Lawrence and Gertrude Bell and departments of universities we have knowadays. Neverthelss some paintings can be interesting as an additional visualisation of certain items. Like this painting from 1900 called "The Nubian Guard" by the Austrian / Habsburg painter Ludwig Deutsch Question I have is; - did the painter use his artistic freedom and incorporate items he collected ( which he was known for and also something Rembrand also did...) - or weapons he saw during his travels in Egypt? - or got inspired by paintings from fellow painters (f.i. "the Bash Bazouks by Paja Jovanovic) ? Looking at this painting, the yataghan does look to me like an Ottoman Bosnian one based upon the look of the hilt decorated with the coral stones, the scabbard partially covered in a red velvet-like cloth (similar to a yataghan I have from the "Bosniaken" Inf. Reg. period 1882-1916). But then again I do not know how yataghans and bichaqs looked in Egypt between 1880-1900.... So what do you guys think is the origin of this yataghsan ? Attached Images

18th July 2020, 12:34 AM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	On top of that, oils were not painted "on the spot". Painters made more or less detailed sketches with the live models, but painted the final drafts in their studios in Europe. It would be virtually impossible to convince some Nubian guard to pose immobile for several hours day after day, to account for the changes in daylight etc. In their studios they had collections of oriental things, including weapons, and just selected the flashiest examples from the hoard. Thus, the weapons in the finished painting had nothing to do with the real stuff. By the same token, the dresses, their colors etc were painted according to the painters' artistic whims. And I am not even talking about orientalist painters being allowed to visit harems and see naked wives of local honchos dancing or taking a bath:-) Last edited by ariel; 18th July 2020 at 05:35 AM.

22nd July 2020, 05:31 AM	#6
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	aspectate cum grano salis These Orientalist paintings are wonderful, artists like Schreier and Gérôme could really evoke a romantic mood of an idealized East, almost wish you could be there despite the sandstorms, broiling heat, and occasionally being kicked by an irate camel. But for reasons already cited, this art is NOT a reliable ethnographic reference source! Any more than we can rely on Hollywood to depict history anywhere near what it actually was, or would have been. Photos are a more certain bet, but not necessarily so. Some photographers set up their shots with local models appropriately tarted up and equipped. You have to look carefully at the details. And it's best to delve into the historical backstory of the place and era, and have a certain familiarity with other aspects of the material culture of that particular civilization -- that way if you find anomalies, you can apply a bit of analysis and decide for yourself.

14th July 2020, 03:58 AM	#2
kahnjar1 Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND Posts: 2,739	I can not comment on the Yataghan but the item worn beside it in the first 2 pics, is definitely a Dharia dagger from Hijaz region of modern day Saudi Arabia. I have no idea on the lance/spear he is carrying. The right hand pic is not the same as the other 2 as the knife by the Yataghan is different and the clothing colour is also not the same. Also the pistol has a ball butt whereas the ones in the other pics do not. It would appear to me that there is quite a regional mixture of weapons here and some editing of the pics also. Stu

14th July 2020, 04:59 AM	#3
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,178	Popular paintings were often copied by the original painter, frequently by their students or employees assigned to such tasks so more people could own a copy. They were frequently signed by the original artist as a stamp of approval, and often contained slight variations. As You note Rembrandt, he was a one who did this. They had quite a production line I've read. A renaissance version of the photo-copy.

18th July 2020, 04:09 AM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,938	This is an excellent and well posed question! I very much agree with the previous entries, and 'orientalism' was a romantic fascination with exotica popular in art and literature. As noted, Rembrandt had quite a collection of arms and armor and used modern (of the time) weapons such as keris in his 'Biblical works to add to artistic effect and drama. As also noted, various weapons, costume and figures were drawn in 'studies' where they were later compiled collectively in a finished work. It is well known that items, features, even characters were taken from other extant works to include in the artists portrayal. I have seen numbers of cases where works were shown in comparison to other works the elements have been taken from. In the Ottoman situation, it is tempting to note the remarkable diversity of their forces and to consider that a subject figure might have weapons from the many sources of arms coming together in such context. While possible, it was not necessarily the case, nor certainly the norm, so it is more likely the items portrayed here are essentially 'license' in my opinion.