OTTOMAN....What do we mean?

[ariel]

Turkish weapons made enormous impact on other Ottoman weapon centers. This is why it is so difficult to pinpoint the exact location of the manufacturer.
Yataghan is an example.
We can be certain only about two subtypes: Zeibek and Laz Bichaq.
Less certain are the North African, Cretan and Focan.
But we cannot distinguish between the Anatolian proper and the Balkan/ Greek/ Bulgarian. Out of necessity we call them Ottoman.

Also, yataghan blades were made. Largely in Turkey and the Balkans; from there they went across the Empire. How should we define examples: by the blade or by the handle/decorations? Again, "Ottoman" is the safest bet.

Somehow, daggers are easier to pinpoint: they must have been less regimented

[DaveA]

Often the regional variations on a common design theme are the most fascinating aspects to me. Saying "Ottoman" merely gives me a set of design themes (e.g., "yataghan") and historical period. Useful, but insufficient IMHO. Indo-Persian was mentioned as a similar challenge. I also think that some ethnic groups that extend across current geopolitical boundaries engender similar questions about the actual location of origin (for example, the Shan of Myanmar/Thailand/China/Laos).

[kahnjar1]

Thanks Gentlemen.
ARIEL....I agree with what you say, but the term Ottoman does not indicate to an UNinformed collector, where any particular weapon might come from. What I was trying to get at with my thread was the general use of the term. As an example, if I had a Yataghan and wanted to know where it came from (without tying it down to the last mile), I would find "Turkey/Balkans" far more informative than just "Ottoman".

DAVEA......Todays geographical boundries do not necessarily give the ACTUAL origin of a piece either as they have changed dramatically over time. A good example of this would be Saudi Arabia which did not even exist as a country until the 1930s, but we see items described as Saudi.
You mention Shan in terms of Myanmar etc. This is a bit different as we are talking TRIBAL here rather than an actual country. Other examples of this would be Tuareg and Berber.
Stu

[Kubur]

I agree with Ariel.
Ottoman is a very practical term to stay vague and to me much more cautious, than to pretend to know exactly where an object comes from.
If i'm sure of an origin for example, I will say Balkans or whatever, if I'm not sure, I will say Ottoman...
For Indo-Persian, I totally agree, it's too big and I don't like this vocabulary.
I guess for a lot of people, Indo-Persian means just a location: between modern days Pakistan and Afghanistan...
A lot of Persian influences in India probably pushed a lot of collectors to talk of Indo-Persians weapons. To me the opposite is not true, except few cases I haven't seen a lot of Indian weapons in Persia... I hope someone will understand what i'm trying to say...

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Kubur

I agree with Ariel.
Ottoman is a very practical term to stay vague and to me much more cautious, than to pretend to know exactly where an object comes from.
If i'm sure of an origin for example, I will say Balkans or whatever, if I'm not sure, I will say Ottoman...
For Indo-Persian, I totally agree, it's too big and I don't like this vocabulary.
I guess for a lot of people, Indo-Persian means just a location: between modern days Pakistan and Afghanistan...
A lot of Persian influences in India probably pushed a lot of collectors to talk of Indo-Persians weapons. To me the opposite is not true, except few cases I haven't seen a lot of Indian weapons in Persia... I hope someone will understand what i'm trying to say...

As we know the Ottoman Empire was rather large and existed for a relatively short time in history, and the term therefore as you say is very vague. There are other ways of answering the question as to origin, that would perhaps be more helpful.....something like, as an example, "Ottoman, possibly/probably Turkish or Balkan" I realise these days that it is not very PC if one is found to be wrong in what they say, but isn't that the purpose of this Forum....to DISCUSS and if possible reach an agreement?? Being wrong is not a crime!
Stu

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

As we know the Ottoman Empire was rather large and existed for a relatively short time in history
Stu

Short time compared to what? The dinosaurs?
1299 - 1923 AD. It's not short to me.
But I agree with you, we learn from our mistakes.

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Short time compared to what? The dinosaurs?
1299 - 1923 AD. It's not short to me.
But I agree with you, we learn from our mistakes.

I think this proves my point. So an item described as "Ottoman" could be anything from 100 to 700 years old and come from almost anywhere. Also anything identified here as Ottoman would have to be made before 1923.