Ottoman Hancer for translation

ariel · 18th March 2020, 07:33 PM

It is difficult to compare India and Balkans.

In India there was a major divide between North and South with a transitional state in Deccan.
At the North, there were, in addition, significant decorative differences between Rajputs and Moghuls.
But on top of it, Indian Rajahs did their best to develop their own styles: Elgood lists multiple styles of Talwar handles.

At the Balkans, the major divide was between the Ottoman-occupied areas that adopted the Ottoman style and the ( current) Croatia and Slovenia, firmly attached to the Western European style. Within the “Ottoman” areas the differences were minute: for example round and smooth corals in Foca. Christian enclaves ( Serbia,Greece, Bulgaria) had major limitations on weapon production and complete bans on carrying. I know of no specifically “Christian” weapons except Epirotic sabers, Cretan Yataghans and Bulgarian Karakulaks.

Thus, the greatest majority of Balkan weapons were of Ottoman style and practically indistinguishable from each other, whereas Indian ones had multiple hints of their origin.

As a paradoxical result, it was much easier for Elgood to attribute and pinpoint Indian weapons than the Balkan ones.

As to Marius’ jambiya/ khanjar it may be of Albanian fashion but spread outside of its original areal, generic Turkish with wide adoption, some personal custom preference etc. Owner’s or master’s name do not tell us much because by that time they became generic Ottoman.

mariusgmioc · 18th March 2020, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

It is difficult to compare India and Balkans.

In India there was a major divide between North and South with a transitional state in Deccan.
At the North, there were, in addition, significant decorative differences between Rajputs and Moghuls.
But on top of it, Indian Rajahs did their best to develop their own styles: Elgood lists multiple styles of Talwar handles.

At the Balkans, the major divide was between the Ottoman-occupied areas that adopted the Ottoman style and the ( current) Croatia and Slovenia, firmly attached to the Western European style. Within the “Ottoman” areas the differences were minute: for example round and smooth corals in Foca. Christian enclaves ( Serbia,Greece, Bulgaria) had major limitations on weapon production and complete bans on carrying. I know of no specifically “Christian” weapons except Epirotic sabers, Cretan Yataghans and Bulgarian Karakulaks.

Thus, the greatest majority of Balkan weapons were of Ottoman style and practically indistinguishable from each other, whereas Indian ones had multiple hints of their origin.

As a paradoxical result, it was much easier for Elgood to attribute and pinpoint Indian weapons than the Balkan ones.

As to Marius’ jambiya/ khanjar it may be of Albanian fashion but spread outside of its original areal, generic Turkish with wide adoption, some personal custom preference etc. Owner’s or master’s name do not tell us much because by that time they became generic Ottoman.

C'mmon Ariel give me something to argue against... please! Agreeing is soo boring...

Interested Party · 19th March 2020, 01:12 AM

Thanks for that gentleman! Life for me is getting very boring as the world goes into hiding and all the companies I work for shut down. It is not a good time to be in the tourism industry.

Kubur, as far as the turquoises go wasn't the Tiflis market dominated by Armenians at that period (pre1840)? Could that help explain the stones?

Marius, I don't read Danish but there do seem to be some inconsistences in the English version. I assumed they were translation errors or difficulties with expressions and terminology. Can you expound on "this kind of absolutely unfounded but published assertions that give rise to fallacies"? I'm not sure I know enough to doubt much less think critically...

I assumed that the koftgari on the Hermitage example was Turkish. For those who have the book is this a correct assumption? Sorry for my poor picture of a picture with already bad resolution.

ariel · 19th March 2020, 04:29 AM

Marius,
I did not intend to offer anything new and provocative. My post was just an attempt to explain your dissatisfaction with Elgood’s hesitant attribution of Balkan weapons. You are correct: very often we wish him to be more definitive, ”this is unquestionably Albanian, “ this is a typical Sarajevo item despite lack of inscriptions” etc. I think he was just limited by the lack of localizing features. With few exceptions Balkan arms are just, well, Balkan in general. Ain’t no Mysore vs. Delhi or Mopla vs. Kathmandu:-)

mariusgmioc · 19th March 2020, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interested Party

Thanks for that gentleman! Life for me is getting very boring as the world goes into hiding and all the companies I work for shut down. It is not a good time to be in the tourism industry.

Kubur, as far as the turquoises go wasn't the Tiflis market dominated by Armenians at that period (pre1840)? Could that help explain the stones?

Marius, I don't read Danish but there do seem to be some inconsistences in the English version. I assumed they were translation errors or difficulties with expressions and terminology. Can you expound on "this kind of absolutely unfounded but published assertions that give rise to fallacies"? I'm not sure I know enough to doubt much less think critically...

I assumed that the koftgari on the Hermitage example was Turkish. For those who have the book is this a correct assumption? Sorry for my poor picture of a picture with already bad resolution.

Do not panic! There is always hope beyond boredom!

I'll do my best to keep you entertained!

First, I don't know about Tfilis being the centre of turqoise market. However, I know that almost all the turquoises in the Middle East and Europe were at that time sourced from the Khorassan province of Iran... but as they gained huge popularity in Turkey and they were brought to Europe from Turkey they were called TURQoise. So the turqoise were popular and traded by Turkey to such extent that their TURKish connection became part of their name.

"this kind of absolutely unfounded but published assertions that give rise to fallacies" -
- assuming that a dagger is made in Tfilis only because it has a scabbard made in Tfilis is an UNFOUNDED ASSERTION in the sense that is based on an incorrect assumption (that the dagger and the scabbard were made at the same time and in the same place).

Futhermore, such an unfounded assertion being published can become embraced by some as being the absolute truth and become a fallacy.

ariel · 19th March 2020, 04:17 PM

There are imprecisions in the translation of Russian into English.
See, for example, item 22: Be slow to insult, quick to avenge.
"To insult" is to offend another person.
In Russian this phrase is: Be slow to anger, etc. With "to anger" as getting offended, becoming angry.

The phrase gets totally different meaning.

And I agree: silver fittings of the scabbard do not necessarily indicate Tiflis production of the dagger as such. In the absence of old provenance I would hesitate to claim its Georgian origin.

18th March 2020, 07:33 PM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	It is difficult to compare India and Balkans. In India there was a major divide between North and South with a transitional state in Deccan. At the North, there were, in addition, significant decorative differences between Rajputs and Moghuls. But on top of it, Indian Rajahs did their best to develop their own styles: Elgood lists multiple styles of Talwar handles. At the Balkans, the major divide was between the Ottoman-occupied areas that adopted the Ottoman style and the ( current) Croatia and Slovenia, firmly attached to the Western European style. Within the “Ottoman” areas the differences were minute: for example round and smooth corals in Foca. Christian enclaves ( Serbia,Greece, Bulgaria) had major limitations on weapon production and complete bans on carrying. I know of no specifically “Christian” weapons except Epirotic sabers, Cretan Yataghans and Bulgarian Karakulaks. Thus, the greatest majority of Balkan weapons were of Ottoman style and practically indistinguishable from each other, whereas Indian ones had multiple hints of their origin. As a paradoxical result, it was much easier for Elgood to attribute and pinpoint Indian weapons than the Balkan ones. As to Marius’ jambiya/ khanjar it may be of Albanian fashion but spread outside of its original areal, generic Turkish with wide adoption, some personal custom preference etc. Owner’s or master’s name do not tell us much because by that time they became generic Ottoman.

19th March 2020, 01:12 AM	#3
Interested Party Member Join Date: Dec 2019 Location: Eastern Sierra Posts: 492	Thanks for that gentleman! Life for me is getting very boring as the world goes into hiding and all the companies I work for shut down. It is not a good time to be in the tourism industry. Kubur, as far as the turquoises go wasn't the Tiflis market dominated by Armenians at that period (pre1840)? Could that help explain the stones? Marius, I don't read Danish but there do seem to be some inconsistences in the English version. I assumed they were translation errors or difficulties with expressions and terminology. Can you expound on "this kind of absolutely unfounded but published assertions that give rise to fallacies"? I'm not sure I know enough to doubt much less think critically... I assumed that the koftgari on the Hermitage example was Turkish. For those who have the book is this a correct assumption? Sorry for my poor picture of a picture with already bad resolution.

19th March 2020, 04:29 AM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Marius, I did not intend to offer anything new and provocative. My post was just an attempt to explain your dissatisfaction with Elgood’s hesitant attribution of Balkan weapons. You are correct: very often we wish him to be more definitive, ”this is unquestionably Albanian, “ this is a typical Sarajevo item despite lack of inscriptions” etc. I think he was just limited by the lack of localizing features. With few exceptions Balkan arms are just, well, Balkan in general. Ain’t no Mysore vs. Delhi or Mopla vs. Kathmandu:-)

19th March 2020, 04:17 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	There are imprecisions in the translation of Russian into English. See, for example, item 22: Be slow to insult, quick to avenge. "To insult" is to offend another person. In Russian this phrase is: Be slow to anger, etc. With "to anger" as getting offended, becoming angry. The phrase gets totally different meaning. And I agree: silver fittings of the scabbard do not necessarily indicate Tiflis production of the dagger as such. In the absence of old provenance I would hesitate to claim its Georgian origin.