On some of the Ottoman and Persian Unofficial SCA groups you can find a file called "There's no such things as Perkish." Which is, honestly, a great document detailing the differences between Ottoman and Safavid Persian clothing. It is important not to broadly lump them together as Middle Eastern, Asian, Islamic, or some other category that blurs the distinction into a fantasy pastiche. On the other hand those are both large empires. It's easy to focus on the differences when you look at the centers of culture, wealth, and power especially when the centers of influence are relatively far apart (the distance from Istanbul to Tabriz is not a lot shorter than the distance from Istanbul to London).
 |
| Map of the Safavid Empire |
On the other hand what would be happening in periphery between the empires. In Baghdad, Mosul, or to stretch the point farther the cities of Armenia? Would the citizens dress like Ottoman Turks, Safavid Persians, or have their own regional dress? Or would they look vaguely Perkish having adopted some elements of dress from both empires and their own regional dress. Books such as Habitus Variarum Orbis Gentium (Costume of the Various Peoples of the World) by Jean Jacques Boissard (1581) show significant differences in dress between cities that are much closer and within countries that otherwise by collectively refered to as "Italian" or "French" dress.
My persona is Georgian from the 12th century so it is easiest for me to look at the topic through that earlier lens. Even a brief look at Georgian frescoes and coins from the Golden Age of the Kingdom of Georgia (more or less the 11th - 13th centuries) shows Turkish sharbush hats and turbans, Turkic, Mongol, and Persian inspired coats, and Byzantine royal regalia. No one would ever speak of Romankic (Byzantic?) even though in many ways the documentable Georgian garb is best described as incorporating some elements of the Eastern Roman Empire, the Turks, and their own native take on things.
From here you could go in many directions. One of my first thoughts is the reminder that many of our thoughts on dress are dependent on images that were created to make a point. Jean Jacques Boissard, like later 19th century ethnologists, focused on the differences in regional dress. The court artists in Georgia who manipulated the appearance of the royals and nobles they represented for political purposes. I also think of the debate between the recreation of specific individual historical objects and the creation of new plausible objects using the techniques and styles of the past. I think of the twists of history, climate, scholarship, and language that lead to the differences in knowledge about different times and places.
I also think about the mixed message in the SCA. The only thing that matters is an attempt at garb yet clearly many people care about accuracy in recreation. I understand why both ideas show up in discussions. I don't even think that they are actually in conflict. Yet I think the fact that they can both matter in the SCA is somewhat problematical. But that is a different article all together.
Comments
Post a Comment