This is from a paper I wrote recently for a competition at WoW. The paper was thrown together over a span of three days (so don't be too hard on me) in between work and getting stuff done for my best friends' wedding. I am also having several formatting issues, so please bear with me as I edit the page. Long paper is long.
One of the biggest challenges I've encountered as a re-enactor is finding quality information on Ottoman art and artifact within the Society timeline. The Ottoman Empire spanned from the 14th Century until the 1920’s, so when researching you have to pay close attention not only to the dates, but to visual clues. After staring at pictures of textiles and miniatures for years, patterns started to emerge. This is my attempt to make sense of a visual history with regards to its textiles as it falls within our time of study.
I
feel that Middle Eastern personas have often been looked upon unfavorably
because a large portion of its participants have a lot of misinformation, resulting
in a very modern aesthetic. While my focus is on Ottoman textiles, it should be
said that a lot of the resulting research can be applied across much of the
Middle East. Most garments were not cut with busts exposed and women didn’t all
walk around naked, nor were they completely covered up. To summarize all of the cultural aspects,
sumptuary laws and clothing styles across the lands and time of the “Middle
East” would be an immense task. One of
the ways we can best make our garments more correct is to have more knowledge
of what patterns are appropriate for what we are attempting to recreate.
Sometimes the only difference between “Persian” and “Ottoman” garb are the
design elements on our fabric. In my attempt to make Ottoman garb more
researched and defined within Society, I have a few windmills: Garments have
necklines not bust lines, stripes are bad, and Paisley is not period.
Paisley
is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as, “a distinctive intricate pattern of curved feather-shaped
figures based on an Indian pine-cone design.” The modern design is named after
a town in Scotland whose textile mills were known for producing a large
quantity of woven fabrics displaying this popular textile motif in the 19th
Century. Paisley again became popular in modern fabrics in the 1970’s. It is
this modern design that we most often find in fabrics that one might choose to
represent Middle Eastern.
The
origins of Paisley may well be “period” for India, where the design element
originates, but a preliminary glance suggests that appropriate designs are
dissimilar from most modern designs available. Overall, paisley is not suitable
for use in Ottoman garb within society time period. Yet, paisley is one of the
most commonly found design elements used by recreationists when creating Middle
Eastern garb.
I
tend to have a permissive attitude about many things involving the Ottomans
because of the sheer amount of peoples and cultures incorporated into their
empire. We can draw lots of assumptions about design and fashion simply based
on the many cultures that the Ottomans conquered or bordered, and the
possibilities of trade. By the 16th Century much of Persia became
part of the empire, so it is reasonable to assume that art, literature and
fashion made a merger. When viewed hundreds of years later it is easy to make
mistakes in judgment of one culture over another.
With that in mind we have to
incorporate cultures such as Mongol, Persian, Byzantine, Greek, Seljuk, Mamlûk,
Berber, and even Rus into our pile of potential influences. During some periods,
specific types of art styles came in vogue that make it difficult to discern
whether something is Ottoman or not because the artist in question might have
been Persian, for example, and so the art style may reflect that.
This
paper is not about paisley; instead it is about what is desirable and
appropriate for the re-enactor. Extant Ottoman garments in museums tend to be
royal, ceremonial, or otherwise male. There are many paintings, travel drawings
and miniatures that show more mundane clothing, but they may be subject to
artistic interpretations. To help shed light on the designs used in Ottoman
garments, I have looked at painted miniatures, illuminated manuscripts,
textiles, Iznik pottery and tiles, and the flora of the Mediterranean. I have
tried my best to use samples of pre 17th century textiles but, much
like Elizabethan research, relevant styles cross over until the end of Osman
the Second’s reign in 1622.
Floral
and Leaf Designs
Where possible, I have tried to include a
botanical example. It is likely, however, that the species that were available
at the time are not quite the same as the examples shown. I have not included
every botanical design, only the most common.
Saz Leaves
I have listed these first
because, if any one design is guilty of misleading the casual observer into
thinking it’s paisley, it would be the Saz style leaves. This artistic style
was popularized by court painter Shah Qulu during the reign of Süleyman the
Magnificent.
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images/h2/h2_52.20.17.jpg
The vine and saz textile below also includes pomegranates.
http://home.earthlink.net/~al-qurtubiyya/Fabric/Bursa_or_Istambul_late16th.jpg
.jpg)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgu8ryGdZPin_3njoOBzpHQ0-Riasn0Ap2ww9ACsaUx-nOwWoNmCrxTde6J2Iohf92u84oKHBRsV4sZUYa62MGw7inhwqprqe3ZJlhNnr05Z3hyETNlaQlQTuqtHdmFWpnSzyeRQRGgJgA/s320/kaftan+kurk+%282%29.jpg
The caftan (above) shows a network of climbing vines
and saz leaves.
Saz-style refers to a school
of art, much like we tend to refer to the “Italian Schools.” Not only is it the
shape of the leaf that is important, but often the colors or shading that makes
it so distinctively “Saz.” It is believed that the type of brush used in the
painting of saz leaves is from where its name is derived.
Cypress
The cypress is a conifer that
is prevalent throughout the Mediterranean. It is tall and thin and lends itself
well in scale to fill out the background of a leaf design. While I have found
very little evidence of its use in clothing, I felt it worthy of mention as a
design element as it is prevalent in miniatures, tiles, and other textile art.
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/70/82/18/70821802d763219c3f1ea914ec660018.jpg
In this caftan it is my suspicion that the thick vines are
representative of Cyprus.
I should mention here that Iznik, much like Saz, is a term
referring to a style of pottery but, like Paisley, is also representative of a
region. Iznik pottery is called so for the art it contains, but the manner in
which it was built as well as the quality. Many of the motifs are saz-style art
done in a different medium; glazes. Tiles can be a great resource for textile
designs when looking at miniatures.
This 21 tile Iznik
wall design includes Roses, Tulips, Saz, and Irises.
http://mini-site.louvre.fr/trois-empires/img/ceramiques-ottomanes/ceramiques-ottomanes8z2.jpg
Palmet or Lotus
The use of lotus and peony
designs is evidence of Chinese and Mongol influence. They are often accompanied
by elaborate scrolls or cloud-vines. This is one of the many examples of the
difficulties in discerning a Persian piece from Ottoman works, as Persian art
is rife with very similar patterns. Often to differentiate between Persian and
Ottoman you might look for bolder prints.
This caftan is believed
to belong to Osman II (1618-22). Velvet stitches on gold cloth with blue velvet
decoration and stylized lotus pattern.
http://www.ee.bilkent.edu.tr/~history/Pictures2/Yeni/costume3_2.JPG
Caftan of Bayezid II Includes several types of flowers
and saz leaves along with the palmet design
Pomegranates
Pomegranates are a symbol of
life and fertility and thusly are very prevalent in Ottoman textiles. The fruit
is common in Ottoman cuisine and literature.
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/5c/a3/12/5ca312eb00699a405ef53810d9ea0673.jpg http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00044/s44t4_files/T3d.jpg
These two are pine
cone and pomegranate fabrics from caftans. Sadly, the example on the right is
post society timeline. As it was an honor robe for a sultan, I think that it
was created to resemble an earlier sultan’s robe because it is similar to a
piece I’ve seen but much bolder of a print.
Tulips
Tulips are not native to the
Ottomans, but quickly grew popular. The species of tulip represented in the
textile motifs is most likely extinct or nearly so. The Dutch tulips we are so
used to seeing are fuller but, the Ottoman tulip is wispy and has beautiful
long tendrils. The botanical picture below is the closest species I could find
to what is believed to be the Ottoman tulip.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PuoJ2BG8mkc/SXciJ6NiDWI/AAAAAAAAAYk/3cX2dG_ntn8/s400/acuminata.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PuoJ2BG8mkc/SXciJ6NiDWI/AAAAAAAAAYk/3cX2dG_ntn8/s400/acuminata.jpg
In the 16th
Century much bolder prints start appearing in noble garments. This may be
because they were easier to see in royal parades, or because they showed
affluence (bigness), or simply for the sultans to separate their cultural art
from those whom they had conquered. The tulip is one of a few designs that when
printed boldly becomes a kind of logo for the sultanate. In contrast to many
other patterns you see throughout this paper that incorporate the tulip, the
garments below show the bold printing of them.
http://media-cache
ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a1/de/a5/a1dea57e9acfdc5ad01e52737456ed77.jpg
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/db/c2/85/dbc285f568007feb0bddc88d481f5c80.jpg
Carnation
(Dianthus sp.)
This is another floral species that is dissimilar from
what we think of as the modern carnation. The key element of the species that
was most likely available in the Ottoman Empire is a smaller quantity of
defined petals with jagged edges, or straw-like, explosive petals.
Carnations are most often
used as a smaller motif within a larger floral pattern. Below are two examples
of carnations being used as a bold print. On the left a painting of a garment
with bold carnations, on the right is a cushion cover.
http://www.hotspots-e-atlas.eu/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/carnations-296x300.jpg
Hyacinth
Hyacinth flowers are worth a
mention as a filler design. It is a popular element in Iznik pottery and some
non-clothing textiles. It is not seen as a bold print and instead is often a
small part of a busy floral design.
http://www.turkishculture.org/picture_shower.php?ImageID=2147 http://mini-site.louvre.fr/trois-empires/img/ceramiques-ottomanes/ceramiques-ottomanes11z2.jpg
(Left)
17th century Pillow Covering featuring Hyacinth.
(Right)
Iznik tile with lots of hyacinth, tulips, carnations and cloud scrolls.
Rose (Damask)
The Damask Rose is made into
Rose Water and used for cleansing and welcome, as well as in cuisine. It is
also used as an oil for cosmetic purposes.
Damask roses have a more
complex petal construction than the modern European rose. Notice the feathery
shape within the rose leaf and the flanges on the bud design (right) is similar
to saz leaves.
(Left) Caftan of Selim II shows a small repeating print of
roses and vines. I was unable to find a close-up of the roses. http://www.turkishculture.org/showpic.php?src=images/image_all/Clothing/Ottoman%20Clothing%20and%20Garments/topkapi19.jpg
16th century fragment with a type of rose. http://www.wilsonartcontract.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/ottoman-textile-yellow.jpg.
Clouds and Çintemani
Clouds are another motif that
blur the lines between Persian and Ottoman, as the cloud design is something we
tend to associate with Asian culture. The Ottoman clouds are usually less
scrolling and more elongated wavy lines.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvKUa6Ku3LZWK4vgUEisSRrnWhf_WMynJGVe7d1BKQcJoBBVH6pzjkLxcw_Osn2j9p4khU7Hz6qRGW_jR_YxhFcxm_hJnRAa2bn157bY8neXRug7y40Y9MTzIpPINGp0tq3d2UMLVSWCI/s320/kaftan+cintemani+detay+%282%29.jpg
Here you will see crescents
which are more often than not, a version of ҫintemani. Çintemani is
typified by three circles, sometimes having eyes inside of them.
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQYVyaXUbYsxEcUXRNRZGf_sNDE7T6HxH1HzqSomAdkwPEe6QhpVg
Several sources refer to the ҫintemani
as a symbol of protection. It is my suspicion that this is similar to the “evil
eye,” which has been an amulet of protection in Islamic lands for centuries.
As mentioned in the tulip
section about the concept of a logo, the ҫintemani motifs are definitely the
design that best illustrates it. They are bold and simple but yet very powerful
symbols.
http://home.earthlink.net/~al-tabbakhah/cintamani/Palace_Dancers.jpg
Ogee
Ogees are pointed ovals.
Often these geometric designs will have other elements such as floral, leaves,
or cintemani. Ogee designs can easily be mistaken for Persian medallions unless
you use florals or other contextual clues to separate them.
The above ogee design incorporates Tulips, Pomegranates,
Carnations and Saz.
Miscellany
While there are a great deal
of animal motifs in Iznik pottery and painted miniatures, it is seemingly rare
to find it in textiles. What I have come across is mostly avian in nature.
There is a miniature where it appears to have a repetitive swan design (right),
and there is also this peacock feather design (left):
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images/h2/h2_52.20.15.jpg http://www.nndb.com/people/713/000113374/selim-ii.jpg
Often seen in the background of many designs are things that
can only be described as clouds or vines that are not distinctly so. Much like
this Iznik selection (below), they may simply be filler but, the style of it is
common and very likely part of the Asian influence mentioned previously.
Modern Fabric Examples
I can’t condemn modern fabric choices and not give
examples of some that are acceptable. Here are some samples of fabrics that I have
found at a retail site that are accessible to the re-creationist.
Not all of these fabrics are wearable, per se, but could
still be used for covering pillows or making tents. In the selections below you
can see carnations, pomegranates, roses, palmets, saz leaves, ogees and tulips.
http://www.joann.com/images/67/80/3/xprd6780381_m.jpg
A Note about Research
When looking at miniatures,
which are large scale paintings done at illuminated manuscript size, you may
have better luck finding motifs in the background than on the people.
http://www.kismeta.com/diGrasse/Costume/sultans_favorite-codex.jpeg
The painting on the above shows women inside the palace. Not
only are the women wearing fabrics with ҫintemani and ogee but the walls and seating are covered with it as
well.
This is an example of where the ҫintemani had formed a quatrefoil which may look
like a geometric flower print from a distance. We can see in the Topkapi Palace
today that there were lots of tiles and textiles on walls and ceilings with
many overlapping patterns.
Palace of Gold and Light Museum Catalogue
Sometimes it’s hard to get decent pattern information from miniatures because the artist would spend more time patterning the background of the painting than what the people were wearing. I suspect that is in part due to the fact that the figures where some of the smallest things in the painting. But the patterning in the background can also give us clues to motifs that the participants might have been wearing (above). And sometimes we get lucky with a painting and get incredible detail on patterns (below).
http://www.info-regenten.de/regent/regent-d/pictures/turkey-Selim-II.jpg
I have tried to show not about the
origins of paisley but rather a look at what designs are more appropriate for
Ottoman garb. It’s easy to see how, at a quick glance, one would think that
paisley is a desirable design element for use in re-creation. Stripes are also absent
from pre-17th century ottoman clothing. There is still a lot of
confusion and misinformation about Middle Eastern design and clothing that is
being perpetuated by well-meaning recreationists. It is my sincere hope that, with
this and further information, those who attempt to recreate Ottoman and other
Middle Eastern garb will make wiser fabric and design choices as we go forward
into the past.
http://home.earthlink.net/~al-qurtubiyya/16/Cod.Vind-palace_women.jpg
Bibliography
“A brief
history of paisley.”
Akar, Azade. Traditional
Turkish Designs. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola, New York 2004.
Ettinghausen, Richard. Arab Painting. Rizzoli International
Publications Inc. New York, 1977.
Evani Ceramic. “The Meaning
of Design.”http://evaniceramic.com/the_meaning_of_design.php
Hali.com “Flora Islamica:
Plant Motifs in the Art of Islam in Copenhagen.” http://www.hali.com/news/flora-islamica-plant-motifs-in-the-art-of-islam-in-copenhagen/.
Ibrahimoglu, Bikem. “Caftans
– Ottoman Imperial Robes.”
http://bikemibrahimoglu.blogspot.com/2010/04/caftans-ottoman-imperial-robes_22.html. April 22,
2010.
“Introduction to the Court Carpets of the Ottoman, Safavid,
and Mughal Empires” http://smarthistory.khanacademy.org/court-carpets-of-the-ottoman-safavid-and-mughal-empires-an-introduction.html.
Kazmi, Nuzhat. Islamic
Art: The Past and Modern. Roli and Jansen, India. 2011.
Kunst, Scott. “Tulips With a
Past.” Horticulture Magazine. http://www.oldhousegardens.com/images/Tulips-With-A-Past.pdf February, 2002.
Levey, Michael. The World
of Ottoman Art. Charles Scribner’s Sons . New York, 1975.
Louvre. Three Empires of
Islam Collection “Iznik and Ottoman
Ceramics.”
Metropolitan Museum of Art:
Online Collections. http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/452854
Palace of Gold and Light:
Treasures from the Topkapi. Istanbul.
Palace Arts Foundation, 2000.
http://threadsofhistory.blogspot.com/2009/09/paisley-visual-history.html. Friday, September 18, 2009.
Porter, Venetia. Islamic Tiles. Interlink Books. Northampton, Massachusetts, 1995.
“Silks from Ottoman Turkey”. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/tott/hd_tott.htm
“Silks from Ottoman Turkey”. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/tott/hd_tott.htm
Sothebys. “Arts of the
Islamic World.” Online Catalogue. http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2008/arts-of-the-islamic-world-l08222/lot.265.html.
Turkish Cultural Foundation. “The Art of Turkish Textiles.”
Victoria and Albert Museum “Plant Motifs in Islamic Art” http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/p/plant-motifs-in-islamic-art/
No comments:
Post a Comment