Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

  1. #1

    Default Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site is useful. I'll repost my comments from TMP of Dec 2013, with new links:
    The stuff on the early period could still do with some work.
    On 1600 TILL 1800 JANISSARY CORPS
    This picture:

    needs a caption as a Janissary by Hans Weigel, 1577

    The long white ostrich feather plumes were not invented by Knotel, he based it on a Janissary by Nicolas de Nicolay, 1577
    •The Janissary Corps Musketeers' buttoned kaftan is painted in various colours, yet was actually a uniform yellow or blue (as can be seen from these original pictures).
    Knotel may have made up the stripes but Ottoman miniatures show also green, red & black. I would have used 'solid colours' rather than "uniform" so as not to give the impression a unit all wore the same colour, unless he can prove they did in the 17th century.

    Pictures from an Album of Ottoman Soldiers dated 1805 which I wish he could have identified:

    have a long s: ſ in the captions.
    Bimbascha should be Bimbascha not Bimbalcha.
    Janitscharen should be Janitscharen not Janitjcharen.

    On the same page there is a link to a Janissary on my Melchior Lorck, 1570-83, site but no mention that Melchior Lorck has a Janissary with an enormous plume


    Figure A, as he notes in a footnote, appears in The Costume of Turkey, Illustrated by a Series of Engravings, 1802 as "a Spahi, belonging to one of the Asiatic provinces", so he should do away with
    •Figure 'A': is identified specifically as a "SIPAHI TIMARIOTE" [1]. Which appears to identify him as a member of the Household cavalry.
    I don't know much about 19th century Ottomans but on this page THE FIRST MODERN OTTOMAN ARMY UNIFORMS 1800 TILL 1826 has this claim:
    It should be noted, that a print illustration of 1808 Ottoman new army soldier clearly identifies a soldier (which can be dated to 1807-08 by the particular headgear he is wearing), as a "Soldier of the Bostandjees, or Corps from the Sultan's Gardeners" (New York Public Library's Digital Gallery, the Vinkhuizjen Collection). This primary evidence presents a very different picture of the origins of the soldiers in the new army, as part of the Sultan's personnel household.
    The Vinkhuizjen Collection is not a primary source. Vinkhuizjen cut pictures out of books which were pasted in albums, losing most of the provenance and most of any text in these books. The dates Vinkhuizjen penciled on these are often the date of publication rather than the date the image represents or the date of the art it is based on. This can vary by decades and centuries.
    On the NAPOLEONIC OTTOMAN JANISSARY CORPS UNIFORMS page is this image:

    which has been stitched together after Vinkhuizjen cut it into pieces (so he had more pictures).
    More effort would be needed to find all Vinkhuizjen's sources.
    There is no "print illustration of 1808 Ottoman new army soldier" with that date in the Vinkhuizjen Collection but this plate:

    dated 1817 by Vinkhuizjen is the one referred to. Vinkhuizjen has cut the caption "Soldier of ditto" from the contents page of McLean's The Military Costume of Turkey. Without the line that appeared above it – the caption is useless.


    This picture on the fantasy Janissary costume page:

    may have appeared in 1880-1900 illustrated encyclopaedias, as noted, but it is from Elbicei Atika. Musée des Anciens Costumes Turcs de Constantinople, par Jean Brindesi, 1855. It also appeared on a set of Turkish postcards made in the 1950s.
    Since Dec 2013: Hans Weigel has been credited; Bimbascha & Janitscharen now appear (alongside the earlier missreadings); the NYPL's note on Vinkhuizjen's collection method is included, Jean Brindesi is noted; McLean's The Military Costume of Turkey is noted; and this footnote added:
    [1] The long white ostrich feather plumes were re-invented by Knotel. However, he based it on Nicolas de Nicolay (1577), as well as the Janissary by Melchior Lorck (1570-83). All these early illustrators show this feature –the Janissary with an enormous plume. However, this is more likely a fantasy element included in the illustrations.
    This re-invention implies that Knotel was unaware of the earlier illustrations, but, it is obvious that Knotel's Janissaries are copied, directly or indirectly, from an Ottoman Janissary by Hans Weigel, Janissaire allant à la guerre by Nicolas de Nicolay & a Janissary by Melchior Lorck.



    This
    •B: Is either: "Ein Janitsar in voller Rüstung"; or, "Ein Tanitfar in voller Rüftung". Translate into 'Tanitfar'= 'Romanian'; and 'in voller Rüftung' = 'in fuller dress'. The implication is that if this is "Janitsar", then this is an actual Ottoman Janissary soldier from 1805, in which case there has been a considerable Europeanization of the Janissary uniform by this date. If however, it is a 'Romanian' provincial soldier, then the costume is more in keeping with the troops from Eastern Europe.
    can be easily discounted as being 'Tanitfar' by comparing the captions of other Janissaries in the same Album of Ottoman Soldiers dated 1805. The boast that these are "put-together for the first time" just means that the captions have been 'photo-shoped' out.

    Druzhina345
    Illustrations of Ottoman Costume & Soldiers
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:45 PM.

  2. #2
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    23,463

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    I know A is most definitely an Egyptian Janissary. I can tell by the blue striped turban.
    C and E looks really weird. Although the hat for C looks to be either Romanian of some sort or Persian.
    E looks to be from some Balkan region; my guess being Greece, Bosnia or Albania.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  3. #3

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Oda Nobunaga View Post
    I know A is most definitely an Egyptian Janissary. I can tell by the blue striped turban.
    C and E looks really weird. Although the hat for C looks to be either Romanian of some sort or Persian.
    E looks to be from some Balkan region; my guess being Greece, Bosnia or Albania.
    A=Ein gemeiner Janitschar in Egypten. A common Janissary in Egypt
    C=Soldat eines Corps Infanterie zu Bagdad. A soldier of a corps of infantry at Baghdad
    D=Ein Bulgar. A Bulgarian
    E=Ein Albaneser Soldat. An Albanian Soldier

    Druzhina345
    Illustrations of Ottoman Costume & Soldiers
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:45 PM.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Although the date of publication may be 1805 (the book they are from has not been identified), the date the costumes represent is suspect. Two are reversed, simplified copies of plates after Vanmour of about 100 years earlier:
    The Great Lord in ceremonial dress for the day of Beiram after Vanmour
    Sadrazam, the Grand Vizier, in Ceremonial Dress and Turban after Vanmour
    Copying or republishing images is not unusual, Ottoman Illustrations from Herrn Baron von Tott's Nachrichten von den Türken und Tataren, Volumes 1 & 2, 1787. are all based on Vanmour.

    ==================================================
    Also from the '1600 TILL 1900 FANTASY JANISSARY UNIFORMS' page:

    From 'The Design Book of Filippo Orsoni' (Victoria and Albert Museum): 14; "a Turkish-style outfit for the pageant", this figure from 1554, illustrates a European fantasy of the Ottoman warrior indented (sic) to awe the spectators in the great armorial pageants popular at the time.

    As can be seen from the examples below, the practice of creating fantasy Janissary costumes continued through-out the 16th – 20th centuries. However, all these are treated in various museum and private collections, and by dealers as if they are authentic items.
    Is it because he is wearing unusual headgear that this is assumed to be 'made up' by the European artist?
    The Ottomans had many official positions that could be identified by their headgear. See examples in Peter Mundy's Album, A briefe relation of the Turckes, their kings, Emperors, or Grandsigneurs, their conquests, religion, customes, habbits, etc. Unusual headgear is to be expected.

    The figure shown above is not a janissary. The hat is no stranger than that of the weight lifters in

    the Surname-i Vehbi, 1720.

    It may be an inaccurate depiction of the

    Herald for Rumelia "Rumeli Chiaus" from the Rċlamb Costume Book

    Dr Chris Flaherty is making an assumption based on little evidence.

    Druzhina
    16th Century Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:47 PM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    The 1600 TILL 1900 FANTASY JANISSARY UNIFORMS page now has
    As can be seen the "Turkish-style outfit for the pageant" (From 'The Design Book of Filippo Orsoni' (Victoria and Albert Museum): 14 - above), has a strong resemblance, to this illustration from the Herald for Rumelia, from the The Ralamb Costume Book, acquired in Constantinople in 1657-58 by Claes Ralamb who led a Swedish embassy to the Sublime Porte.

    The name Rumelia was largely applied to the Ottoman possessions in Europe, for the most part in Ottoman possession since the 14th respectively 15th century.

    In the Filippo Orsoni design, the foot Herald (a diplomatic role to the Ottoman Court), has been substantially altered into a largely fantasy figure, namely:

    • A fully armoured cavalryman.
    • The four-pointed hat has been enlarged and heavy decorated.
    • The 'mace-of-state', has become a war-mace.

    The Filippo Orsoni design has been created for a European pageant, and theatrical display.
    with this picture of the herald:

    Again, the caption has been cut off.

    Dr Flaherty has assumed a foot Herald, but, all the figures in the Ralamb Costume Book are on foot including the spahi cavalry. An Ottoman Herald ("Rumeli Chiaus" in the Ralamb caption) is likely to have ridden when needed. He would have accompanied armies in the field and would take charge of prisoners. He is wearing spurs.

    The Rumeli Chiaus is not a diplomatic role to the Ottoman Court; that would be the Chiaus Passi [Baş Çavuş] also pictured in the Ralamb Album.

    Rycault, 1667, wrote “Of the Chiauses. These having both offensive and defensive arms assigned them, may be reckoned in the number of the militia, though their office being chiefly in relation to civil processes and laws, they may rather deserve the name of pursuivants of Serjeants … “
    A pursuivant is a junior herald.

    Of course the Ralamb Album is a century later so this herald is not the model for Filippo Orsoni's horseman.

    1) There is no visible armour on Orsoni's horseman, except the possibility of mail sleeves (which may just be spots like the horseman on the left in ‘The Ottoman Army at Tiflis’, 1578). If he was “fully armoured” there might be vambraces and helmet visible even if other armour was hidden under the coat. It would not be unusual for 16th century Ottomans to have more armour than those of the 17th century.

    2) It would be ‘the four-pointed hat has been reduced and been less decorated’ for the correct chronology. The hats are not that similar.
    There is a Serbian saint with a red and blue hat similar to Orsoni's horseman:

    Manasija Monastery, Serbia, XV century

    The hat would have to be an "inaccurate depiction" for Orsoni's horseman to be an Ottoman Herald for Rumelia like Ralamb's (assuming the hat type is standard for the office, as it seems other hats were, and that this also applied in the 16th century).

    3) If the mace is not a symbol of office then this is not a herald. It would not be unusual for the much later Ralamb figure to have a more symbolic mace. The maces look very similar to me – this is the reason I suggested this figure – there is not a “strong resemblance” to the rest of the costume, but more than for the Herald of Egypt who wears a red zamt hat in the Ralamb Album.


    Druzhina345
    Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:49 PM.

  6. #6
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    23,463

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Ottoman uniforms are so cool and flamboyant. I can understand why many in the 1800s tried to copy some of these styles.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  7. #7
    Aru's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Here.
    Posts
    4,810

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Pandurs of count Trenk fought in Ottoman looking uniforms in war of Austrian succession to intimidate enemies. Apparently all that flamboyance was scary to Europeans.
    Has signatures turned off.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Dr Flaherty isn't beyond criticising other historians. For one about Knotel - see above, which has now been removed from his site.
    One of his criticisms of David Nicole is:
    There is currently no explanation as to why is this particular costume is so elaborate for the senior officer in the 32nd Janissary Orta (Left: there were two - the 32nd Orta, and the Boluk 32nd Orta [3]). The only notes provided by Nicolle is that the "32nd (or 33rd): commanded by the Kahya Yeri or deputy Kahya" [4]. However, this is a complete fantasy attribution, when it is understood that the phrase 'Kahya Yeri', simply means itself "Commander" [5]. Whereas, Nicolle in his sentence - "commanded by the Kahya Yeri ... " (attempts to suggest this is some special title, which is a fantasy).
    [1] David Nicolle's 1995 The Janissaries (Elite #58, Osprey).
    [2] Stuart, W. Pyhrr (1989) European Armor from the Imperial Ottoman Arsenal (Metropolitan Museum Journal 24): 87.
    [3] Illustrations extracted from the book by Mahmud Sevket Pasha ‘L'Organisation et les Uniformes de l'Armee Ottomanne (1907).
    [4] Nicolle, ibid.
    [5] "local commander of troops (Sipah Kahya Yeri), the commander of Janissaries". See Pierre Mackay Acrocorinth in 1668, A Turkish Account: American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Oct.-Dec., 1968): 388.
    Dr Flaherty uses so few sources that I would not be surprised if there is something he is unaware of, but, he is adamant. Fantasy seems to be one of his favourite words.
    A quick Google translate gives:
    Kâhya = butler
    Yeri = place of (so could be lieu, vice, deputy etc.)
    So it does not simply mean "Commander", it is more complicated. It is not unknown for the position of servant to an important Ottoman to become a much more important position. For example see the Rijkmuseum's text to a painting of Mehmet Kâhya of Kul Kâhyasî, adjudant van de Aga by Vanmour and my attempt at translation.

    Does anyone have any more information on this?

    Druzhina345
    Paintings of Ottomans by Jean-Baptiste Vanmour, 1699-1737
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:51 PM.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Dr Flaherty isn't beyond criticising other historians. For one about Knotel - see above, which has now been removed from his site.
    One of his criticisms of David Nicole is:
    There is currently no explanation as to why is this particular costume is so elaborate for the senior officer in the 32nd Janissary Orta (Left: there were two - the 32nd Orta, and the Boluk 32nd Orta [3]). The only notes provided by Nicolle is that the "32nd (or 33rd): commanded by the Kahya Yeri or deputy Kahya" [4]. However, this is a complete fantasy attribution, when it is understood that the phrase 'Kahya Yeri', simply means itself "Commander" [5]. Whereas, Nicolle in his sentence - "commanded by the Kahya Yeri ... " (attempts to suggest this is some special title, which is a fantasy).
    [1] David Nicolle's 1995 The Janissaries (Elite #58, Osprey).
    [2] Stuart, W. Pyhrr (1989) European Armor from the Imperial Ottoman Arsenal (Metropolitan Museum Journal 24): 87.
    [3] Illustrations extracted from the book by Mahmud Sevket Pasha ‘L'Organisation et les Uniformes de l'Armee Ottomanne (1907).
    [4] Nicolle, ibid.
    [5] "local commander of troops (Sipah Kahya Yeri), the commander of Janissaries". See Pierre Mackay Acrocorinth in 1668, A Turkish Account: American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Oct.-Dec., 1968): 388.
    Dr Flaherty uses so few sources that I would not be surprised if there is something he is unaware of, but, he is adamant. Fantasy seems to be one of his favourite words.
    A quick Google translate gives:
    Kâhya = butler
    Yeri = place of (so could be lieu, vice, deputy etc.)
    So it does not simply mean "Commander", it is more complicated. It is not unknown for the position of servant to an important Ottoman to become a much more important position. For example see the Rijkmuseum's text to a painting of Mehmet Kâhya of Kul Kâhyasî, adjudant van de Aga by Vanmour and my attempt at translation.

    Anyone have any more information on this?

    Druzhina345
    Paintings of Ottomans by Jean-Baptiste Vanmour, 1699-1737
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:51 PM.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    L'etat militaire de l'empire ottoman : ses progrès et sa décadence by Luigi Ferdinando Marsili, Amsterdam, 1732, has a list of Janissary officers on page 69:

    JENIZER-AGASY.
    SEYMEN-BASSY.
    JENIZER-EFFENDI.
    MUSUR-AGA
    CHIAJA-JERY.
    BAS-CHIAUS,
    & ORTA-CHIAUS.

    There follows on p70 a paragraph for each, but, in the place of the CHIAJA-JERY is instead “CHIAJA-BEGH”.

    The most interested bit is earlier on p69. The French text (there is also the same in Italian):
    Les BOLUKIS sont encore privilègiés, mais non pas tant; leurs Capitaines sont indispensablement obliges de porter des bottines rouge, ce qui marque qu’ils n’ont pas droit de paroitre à cheval dans les fonctions. Le KIAJA-JERY, & le MUSUR-AGA sont privilègiés a cet égard, & peuvent aller à cheval, non pas à cause qu’ils sont Capitaines de deux Compagnies des BOLUKIS; mais à cause de leur emploi, qui a raport à tout le Corps des Janissaires, & ils ont encore la permission de porter des bottines jaunes.
    A basic translation:
    The BOLUKIS are still privileged, but not so much; their Captains are indispensably obliged to wear red boots, which marks they have no right to appear on horseback in functions. The KIAJA-JERY, and the MUSUR-AGA are preferred over others, and can go on horseback, not because they are captains of two companies of BOLUKIS; but because of their jobs, who report to the whole body of the Janissaries, and they still are allowed to wear yellow boots.


    So it seems that as well as being a general title “Kâhya Yeri” (Kethüda Yeri, Kiaja-Jeri, Chiaja-Jeri or Chiaja-Begh) is also a specific, high ranking officer in the Janissary corps. He is also described as a colonel and as commanding a Janissary unit in the Bölük Division. What is missing is the name of the orta.

    All these sources may be inaccurate, but, David Nicolle did not dream this up, it is not “complete fantasy”.

    If the unit commanded by the Kâhya Yeri is the 32nd in the Bölük Division, could this be an explanation for the more than usually elaborate costume in the image displayed by Dr Flaherty, as the commander may be a much more important figure than the average orta commander?


    Druzhina345
    Illustrations of Ottoman Costume & Soldiers
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:52 PM.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:53 PM.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    The image above may be based on a French illustration:

    Which kismata gives a date of 1680s and the Vinkhuijzen collection has in 1820-25.
    Does anyone know what publication(s) these are from?

    If it is then the colours used may not be reliable.

    Druzhina345
    Ottoman Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:53 PM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Dr Chris Flaherty's 'Ottoman Uniforms' site

    The section is now back and says:
    Whereas, Nicolle in his sentence - "commanded by the Kahya Yeri ... " (attempts to suggest this is some special title, which is a fantasy attribution i.e. 'creating a unit called the 'KEHYA YERI', who is commanded by this particular officer).
    Dr Flaherty is now in fantasy land.

    Among others, a bullet point has been added:
    • Red boots: Indicating he is foot Colonel in the Janissary (See discussion on Mounted Janissary Colonels/Yellow boots - 1600 till 1800 Part 1: Ottoman Military Rank System).
    Are the boots of the central figure red, like the shoes of the attendants, or are they yellow-brown?

    Druzhina345
    Illustrations of Ottoman Costume & Soldiers
    Last edited by druzhina345; September 07, 2018 at 09:54 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •