Persian art painting of Turks and Arabs

[ButlerKing]

Okay..... I always keep seeing a difference of painting between Turks and Arabs, tell me why there is a huge difference in eye shape, size and face drawing? Surely if Turks were Caucasoid like some Turkish people have claimed than why did they drew them so differently from the Arabs.

Please explain this to me.

Okay sure in Painting of Arabs look you can argue it has some Mongoloid influence like the big slanted eyes

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Mohammed_kaaba_1315.jpg


by Rashid al-Din, published in Tabriz, Persia, 1307 A.D.
http://www.pjmedia.com/zombie/files/2010/04/Jami_al-Tawarikh_Gabriel.jpg

But yet when they draw Turks they always looks so Mongoloid with very small slanted eyes.

English: Babur and Humayun Persian style painting in 1650
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Babur_and_Humayun.jpg

Garden Scene, Aq Quyunlu period (1396–1508), ca. 1430
Iran, possibly Tabriz Opaque watercolor and gold on undyed silk

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images/h2/h2_57.51.24.jpg

[Scholarios]

Hmmm... Butler... I want to side with you on this, and without a working knowledge of Islamic art epochs.. these two sets pf paintings look quite different styles and epochs. i could be wrong. Does anyone know?

[ButlerKing]

Hmmm... Butler... I want to side with you on this, and without a working knowledge of Islamic art epochs.. these two sets pf paintings look quite different styles and epochs. i could be wrong. Does anyone know?


I don't know but one of the reason I believe in it strongly is because there still Mongoloid looking Turks in Persia. For example this paintings is found in today's Golestan palace were Mongoloid Turks still lives lol

Painting by Rashid al-Din
http://en.wikipedia.org/Rashid al-Dinwiki/Shahnameh
http://grahamschoolartssciences.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Shahnameh-The-Shahs-Wise-Men-Approve-Zals-Marriage.jpg

http://www.payvand.com/news/05/may/1196.html

Here are same people from the same location where the painting is today.

http://mm.iteams.org/uploads/images/Central%20Asia/Turkman/Turkman_Chilren__Pakistan__CD3_60.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3001/2759029152_2a6c9d43e8.jpg
http://iranian.com/NaderDavoodi/2004/August/Azadi/Images/2.jpg
http://footbik.narod.ru/IGROKY/A/IZO/AZIZI_KHODADAD_jpg.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Painting of a Safavid youth ( A turk )
http://content.lib.washington.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/dia&CISOPTR=7180

Title A youth, detail
Category Persian Painting
MS title and folio number Harvard University. Art Museums. Manuscript. Inv. 36.27
Detail Detail, Later Safavid painting of Isfahan
Location Iran -- Isfahan
Dynasty Safavids
Subject, LCSH Art, Islamic -- Iran
Miniature paintings -- Iran -- 17th century
Young men
Turbans
Subject, AAT Miniatures (paintings)
People
Youth
Heads (representations)
Headdresses
Date c. 1600

http://content.lib.washington.edu/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/dia&CISOPTR=7180


A turkic rule dynasty


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Safavid_Empire_1501_1722_AD.png

[ButlerKing]

Bump

I want the Turkish people to explain to me these differences.

[ButlerKing]

Okay, so I could be wrong about Ottoman miniatures but despite that you can see clear difference in these miniatures.

http://www.altarmodeling.com/images/fatih_sultan_mehmed_12.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Sahname-i_Selim_Khan_9r.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Turks, please answer these differences.

[Methmatician]

http://www.altarmodeling.com/images/fatih_sultan_mehmed_12.jpg

Ancient Serb spotted :D

[Proto-Shaman]

uber :laugh:

[Hayalet]

Turks, please answer these differences.
The differences between what and what? Your posts are hard to follow.

[ButlerKing]

The differences between what and what? Your posts are hard to follow.

The difference between the Turks in Turkey and Iran.

[RussiaPrussia]

old Persian art is some of the most beautiful i have seen. It was done when they embraced more their asianess with influence of chinese culture and when they still were aryans but then they became more islamezid and mixed with arabs.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bf/Miniator_hotel_shah_abbas_deevar.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Mehmooni2.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Prince_Muhammad-Beik_by_Reza_Abbasi.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Iranian_Wedding_Ceremony.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Muhammadi_concert_1584.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/Twolovers.jpg

[Hayalet]

The difference between the Turks in Turkey and Iran.
Are you arguing that Turks in Iran were depicted as slant-eyed but Turks in Turkey weren't? If so, how about this palace servant from Istanbul?

http://www.yeniansiklopedi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/minyatur-hizmetli.jpg

Hunter:

http://www.yeniansiklopedi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/minyatur-avci.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Are you arguing that Turks in Iran were depicted as slant-eyed but Turks in Turkey weren't? If so, how about this palace servant from Istanbul?

http://www.yeniansiklopedi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/minyatur-hizmetli.jpg

Dude, I see only a slanty eye man in this picture.

The Turks pictures in Iran have Korean chinky face Mongoloid depiction.

[evon]

As ive said many times in threads on people using busts, statues and paintings from the past to depict people in an ethnic frame as is the case here, is terrible erroneous and very ignorant of art history and its progression and reality.

Firstly, most artists in the past did not paint things as they were, but as they wanted them to be, or as they envisioned them, this is especially true of post-mortem representations, but also of contemporary accounts. A good example is the many images of Agustus ceasar, whom we have a good varied amount of statues of, some made while he was alive and others post-mortem, but in reality we do not know what he looked like and we know that the statues we have are basically propaganda tools to enforce his rule.

Thus posting such pictures and wondering about small peculiarities such as this is futile and goes against everything art history tells us..

[ButlerKing]

As ive said many times in threads on people using busts, statues and paintings from the past to depict people in an ethnic frame as is the case here, is terrible erroneous and very ignorant of art history and its progression and reality.

Firstly, most artists in the past did not paint things as they were, but as they wanted them to be, or as they envisioned them, this is especially true of post-mortem representations, but also of contemporary accounts. A good example is the many images of Agustus ceasar, whom we have a good varied amount of statues of, some made while he was alive and others post-mortem, but in reality we do not know what he looked like and we know that the statues we have are basically propaganda tools to enforce his rule.

Thus posting such pictures and wondering about small peculiarities such as this is futile and goes against everything art history tells us..


Ceaser look Caucasoid in all the paintings no matter how unaccurate his face was but why would Persians paint Turks like some Korean face Mongoloid instead of Caucasoid?

Also, what about the Turks who look like this in Afghan, Pakistan, Iran, can we ignore their existence?

http://key2persia.com/shared/data/pages/lang/iran_travel_guide/north_iran/turkmennomads/iran_turkmen_nomads.jpg
http://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/photo-essays/bbc2.jpg
http://iranian.com/Arts/July97/Turkman/Images/Photo42.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Okay, I'll admit. This painting does look very Mongoloid for a Instanbul Turk painting, it's not only the slanty eye traits but the whole face but I don't know man, it's very possible that some Ottoman Turks had a more Mongoloid face before the absorbing many slaves from Balkans, Caucasus.

http://www.yeniansiklopedi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/minyatur-avci.jpg

[evon]

Ceaser look Caucasoid in all my painting no matte the accurateness is his face is but why would Persians paint Turks like some Korean face Mongoloid instead of Caucasoid?

Also, what about the Turks who look like this Afghan, Pakista, Iran, can we ignore their existence?


Its not about looking Caucasian or not that is the problem of using old art as a tool for representation, its the whole art piece, most of them are creations of fable from the creators side, only very rarely are there artists in history whom made what we today would call "true to life" representation..

The best example of fables that people know about is the famous Orientalist paintings from the last few 100 years, this one is among the most known from 1884(Jean Leon Gerome, The Slave Market):

http://www.travel-studies.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-size/Jean-Leon-Gerome-The-Slave-Market-1884-590x784.jpg

The Orientalist are a good example of this sort of mindset, because they deliberately tried to paint what they saw as the real middle east, regardless of what the actual reality was like, as in their mind the real middle east was a static one steeped in old tradition, filled with masculine control over the feminine sexuality and void of modern utilities, which is of course nonsense..

[ButlerKing]

Its not about looking Caucasian or not that is the problem of using old art as a tool for representation, its the whole art piece, most of them are creations of fable from the creators side, only very rarely are there artists in history whom made what we today would call "true to life" representation..

The best example of fables that people know about is the famous Orientalist paintings from the last few 100 years, this one is among the most known from 1884:

http://www.travel-studies.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-size/Jean-Leon-Gerome-The-Slave-Market-1884-590x784.jpg

The Orientalist are a good example of this sort of mindset, because they deliberately tried to paint what they saw as the real middle east, regardless of what the actual reality was like, as in their mind the real middle east was a static one steeped in old tradition, filled with masculine control over the feminine sexuality and void of modern utilities, which is of course nonsense..

Old art is still more accurate than modern one, it's close to the date those people were drawn. So what was the whole point of these ancient Iranian painters making Turks look like some Mongoloid Koreans? for what purpose though, they did it for strange reasons?

[evon]

Old art is still more accurate than modern one, it's close to the date those people were drawn. So what was the whole point of these ancient Iranian painters making Turks look like some Mongoloid Koreans? for what purpose though, they did it for strange reasons?

No, it is not, the Orientalists are not a exception to the rule, they are the rule. Another good example is depictions of Jesus, looking at various pictures of Jesus since ancient times upto modern times is like looking at a long line of strangers, separated by different art eras and traditions, the earliest known examples are usually short haired boyish men in happy spirit, while later you get the older bearded and long haired man in paint and suffering.

Here is an example from Persian art that seems to hit the nail on the target, look at the picture, which is painted in the Timurid era, while being a depiction of a ancient Iranian hero, whom very unlikely look this eastern:
http://thushaveiheard.blogspot.no/2008/04/prince-humay-meets-princess-humayun.html
http://www.puzzles-et-jeux.com/photos/A5/A576/A576-150/_/1000x1500/1.jpg
The image is a fabled meeting between a Persian man and a Chinese woman in ancient times.

[ButlerKing]

No, it is not, the Orientalists are not a exception to the rule, they are the rule. Another good example is depictions of Jesus, looking at various pictures of Jesus since ancient times upto modern times is like looking at a long line of strangers, separated by different art eras and traditions, the earliest known examples are usually short haired boyish men in happy spirit, while later you get the older bearded and long haired man in paint and suffering.

Here is an example from Persian art that seems to hit the nail on the target, look at the picture, which is painted in the Timurid era, while being a depiction of a ancient Iranian hero, whom very unlikely look this eastern:
http://thushaveiheard.blogspot.no/2008/04/prince-humay-meets-princess-humayun.html
http://www.puzzles-et-jeux.com/photos/A5/A576/A576-150/_/1000x1500/1.jpg
The image is a fabled meeting between a Persian man and a Chinese woman in ancient times.


Can you prove to me this Humay is not a Iraniancized Turk? 1430 was still under the Turkic rule and some Persian princes were actually Turks or half Turks.

[evon]

Can you prove to me this Humay is not a Iraniancized Turk? 1430 was still under the Turkic rule and some Persian princes were actually Turks or half Turks.

You should have clicked the link i provided.

Depicts the story told in the legendary epic, Humay & Humayun, written by Khwaja Kirmani (1281-1352 AD), which describes the love story between Prince Humay, son of the mythical Iranian hero Hushang (the Haoshanha of the Avesta), for Humayun, Princess of China. This painting, 6 by 8½ in., belongs to the Timurid period of 'Persian art, after the Mongol conquerors, Genghis Khan and Tamerlane, had brought in Chinese influences. But there is no Chinese depth or shading in the picture. The pure red, gold, blue and green robes of the figures, their rouged cheeks and the formalized tree and flowers are all in the Persian style of clear, brilliant, primarily decorative design.

Pince Humay, if he ever lived (very doubtful if you ask me), would have lived very early in Persian history since the stories about him, or rather about his hero father are mainly from the Avesta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avesta). So long before Turkic speaking peoples came to Persia.

[ButlerKing]

You should have clicked the link i provided.


Pince Humay, if he ever lived (very doubtful if you ask me), would have lived very early in Persian history since the stories about him, or rather about his hero father are mainly from the Avesta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avesta). So long before Turkic speaking peoples came to Persia.

http://www.asiaticsociety.org.bd/journals/Golden_jubilee_vol/articles/ABM%20Husain.htm
The meeting of Prince Humay and Princess Humayun in the garden palace of Chinese Emperor: Diwan-i-Khawaju Kirmani (late 15th century), Paris Muse d' Art Decoratif. The scene is poetic and represents an imaginary picture of the romantic love-story of the two characters in the garden of bliss. The dresses, the flower-plants, the delicate architectural members, the arabesques of the hashiya, the blue sky with golden stars and the Nastaliq style of writings within are typically Persian.

[ButlerKing]

That still doesn't mean the drawing of Turks in the pictures doesn't represent Mongoloid features though.

Do you have any accurate date pictures of Iranians looking like Mongoloid?

[evon]

The meeting of Prince Humay and Princess Humayun in the garden palace of Chinese Emperor: Diwan-i-Khawaju Kirmani (late 15th century), Paris Muse d' Art Decoratif. The scene is poetic and represents an imaginary picture of the romantic love-story of the two characters in the garden of bliss. The dresses, the flower-plants, the delicate architectural members, the arabesques of the hashiya, the blue sky with golden stars and the Nastaliq style of writings within are typically Persian.

This is just my point, it is a art piece created in a Timurid era atmosphere, and its so easy to spot the influence from China in art style, and these are not "true depictions" of ancient Iranians, or of Iranians at the time of painting.

[ButlerKing]

This is just my point, it is a art piece created in a Timurid era atmosphere, and its so easy to spot the influence from China in art style, and these are not "true depictions" of ancient Iranians, or of Iranians at the time of painting.

That maybe a Timurid influence picture during his conquest of 15th century but like I said many Turks became Iranicized in Persia since the Ghavnavids time, how do we know for sure those painting aren't Turks anyway? yeah sure Humay is Iranian but the face could still be a representation of how some Turk-Iranian prince have looked like in the 15th century.

This picture is drawn during Rashidid times with no influence from Timurid.

http://grahamschoolartssciences.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Shahnameh-The-Shahs-Wise-Men-Approve-Zals-Marriage.jpg

[Proto-Shaman]

Pince Humay, if he ever lived (very doubtful if you ask me), would have lived very early in Persian history since the stories about him, or rather about his hero father are mainly from the Avesta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avesta). So long before Turkic speaking peoples came to Persia.
Well, not exactly:

“To judge from all this one may consider that the tribes known under the name Su, Turukkaean and Lullubaean were differently named inhabitants of the Aratta country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aratta) and probably belonged to the Altaic-Turkish language community. [...]. According to the coincidence of territory, the Turukkaean, Su and Lullubaean language was related to the langeage of the Aratta population which was probably of Altaic-Turkic ethnolinguistic origin.”

Source: Ernst Herzfeld, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Abteilung Teheran, Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran , Band 19, Dietrich Reimer, 1986, p.89 (http://books.google.de/books?id=TWIuAQAAIAAJ)

[ButlerKing]

What I'm trying to say is even though the picture of Humay was Chinese inspired, it doesn't mean that the way prince of Humay was drawn in that picture would not have looked like the Turks-Persian princes who ruled Persia in 15th century

[evon]

That maybe a Timurid influence picture during his conquest of 15th century. And like I said many Turks became Iranicized in Persia since Ghavnavids time, how do we know for sure those painting aren't Turks.

This picture is drawn during Rashidid times with no influence from Timurid.


You are missing the point, the point is that artists are not photographers, and paintings and statues are not pictures, they are creations, tailored to the times they were created (this is the rule), so to us whom look at them from a modern perspective we need to know allot of basic info if we are to decode all the cultural symbolisms and general cultural baggage they contain, an example is if i were to go into a museum here in my city and look at pictures from the 1800's into the early 1900's, if i were ignorant about the cultural ideas of the time i might look at them and see a society radically different from what it actually was in a true sense, because at that time the artists wanted to convey a certain romantic image of Norway and its rural life, and its the same with later eras.

A typical theme in some locations is of painting important people larger then those of less importance, another is painting/sculpting them younger or older (Augusts is Usually painted/sculpted as a ageless young man), some were painted/sculpted to reflect wisdom, as with Socrates, and the list goes on endlessly, all depending on whom were depicted and when, i cant think of a single era in history where making true to life depictions was the norm..

I dont have my art books with me at the moment, but i can quote them at length on the very subject of representation when i get them next..

[ButlerKing]

You are missing the point, the point is that artists are not photographers, and paintings and statues are not pictures, they are creations, tailored to the times they were created (this is the rule), so to us whom look at them from a modern perspective we need to know allot of basic info if we are to decode all the cultural symbolisms and general cultural baggage they contain, an example is if i were to go into a museum here in my city and look at pictures from the 1800's into the early 1900's, if i were ignorant about the cultural ideas of the time i might look at them and see a society radically different from what it actually was in a true sense, because at that time the artists wanted to convey a certain romantic image of Norway and its rural life, and its the same with later eras.

A typical theme in some locations is of painting important people larger then those of less importance, another is painting/sculpting them younger or older (Augusts is Usually painted/sculpted as a ageless young man), some were painted/sculpted to reflect wisdom, as with Socrates, and the list goes on endlessly, all depending on whom were depicted and when, i cant think of a single era in history where making true to life depictions was the norm..

And you are also missing my point from the beginning of my post. If these artists had drew Turks like Caucasoid and yet there isn't a single Turk that is Caucasoid in modern Iran than I wouldn't have buy any of those portraits. Point is there is Mongoloid looking people in Persia, and according to genetics of Turkmen in Iran they have 0% C3 but have 42.6% of haplogroup Q. so that means any Mongoloid features in Turkmen was unaffected by Mongolians and now adding to the fact the painting of Turks look mongoloid too that is huge evidence to me of what Turks in Iran would looked like or at least what the upper class looked like.

Do you get what I'm saying?

http://www.artsandsongs.com/en/components/com_fpss/images/Turkmen.jpg

[ButlerKing]

It would be foolish and weird not to link Mongoloid looking Turks in Persia with those ancient Mongoloid drawing of Turks in ancient Persia. It's unconvincing to me to say there is no connection.

[Onur]

Butlerking, your obsessions is quite traumatic. I already told you about miniature art before and evon tried to explain this to you too but you still keep repeating your pointless arguments.

These are miniatures, NOT pictures. The miniature artists draws people and objects according to some defined set of shapes and forms. It`s easy to recognize this because most people`s face looks quite same in the miniatures even if it`s drawn in different artists, time periods or different countries. This is not because they are mongoloid or something else but thats how they draw in miniatures.

[ButlerKing]

Butlerking, your obsession is quite traumatic. I already told you about miniature art before and evon tried to explain this to you too but you still keep repeating your pointless arguments.

These are miniatures, NOT pictures. The miniature artists draws people and objects according to some defined set of shapes and forms. It`s easy to recognize this because most people`s face looks quite same in the miniatures even if it`s drawn in different time periods or different countries. This is not because they are mongoloid or something else but thats how they draw in miniatures.


I'm not convinced, it doesn't matter if he explained his points, I will only be convinced when I see a Iranian depicted as Mongoloid in the drawing and have nothing to do with Turks. But so far I don't see Persian miniatures with such faces at all other than imaginary depiction of Huyam under the Turkic rule.

[evon]

And you are also missing my point from the beginning of my post. If these artists had drew Turks like Caucasoid and yet there isn't a single Turk that is Caucasoid in modern Iran than I wouldn't have buy any of those portraits. Point is there is Mongoloid looking people in Persia, and according to genetics of Turkmen in Iran they have 0% C3 but have 42.6% of haplogroup Q. so that means any Mongoloid features in Turkmen was unaffected by Mongolians and now adding to the fact the painting of Turks look mongoloid too that is huge evidence to me of what Turks in Iran would looked like or at least what the upper class looked like.

Do you get what I'm saying?



You should stop mixing art with hard sciences such as Genetics, art and historical materials (texts and such) of any kind are not subject to the laws of hard sciences, but are subject to human behaviour and ideas, hence you cant use them as anthropological data of any kind without allot of insight into their creation, its just absurd to use them like this. but if you wount take my word for it i will just have to get some sources and quote some art historians when i get the book, hopefully i can do it tomorrow..

[ButlerKing]

You should stop mixing art with hard sciences such as Genetics, art and historical materials (texts and such) of any kind are not subject to the laws of hard sciences, but are subject to human behaviour and ideas, hence you cant use them as anthropological data of any kind without allot of insight into their creation, its just absurd to use them like this. but if you wount take my word for it i will just have to get some sources and quote some art historians when i get the book, hopefully i can do it tomorrow..

I mixed it because there is correlation.

I don't find it absurd, what's absurd to me is if you blindly ignore them and claim their is no link.

[evon]

alittle late, but as we say here, better late then never:)

Here are some quotes with regard to Hellenic and Roman art:

With regards to Alexander the great:


But there are no grounds for thinking that these posthumous likenesses (with reference to images of Alexander on coins) do more than conjure up an impression of how the boy wonder ought to have looked. Nor are we on any firmer ground with the surviving marble heads....We need not imagine that the 'real' Alexander, any more than the 'real' Augustus, actually looked like his 'portraits'. The point is that at some stage, whether during or after his lifetime, a distinctive type was established as the image of Alexander. It was an idealizing portrayal of a divinely inspired monarch...
p226

With regards to Italic "verism":


For when anyone demands to be depicted 'warts and all' (as Oliver Cromwell knew, when he coined the phrase) they are making a statement about themselves, not asking for a replica of themselves... the reason why Greek rulers liked to fix their portraits as if somewhere in their 20's, while great Romans of the Republic froze at 50 or so, are to do not with how they looked, but with how they wanted to be portrayed; not with how skilfully artists could capture reality, but with how powerfully they could deliver the images valued in their society.
p230

both taken from Classical art, From Greece to Rome. Bead and Henderson. 2001.

[meera]

As we all know that every nation has its own culture. Few nations have very rich, strong and inspiring but some have adopted others' culture and traditions because they are highly effected by their traditions and have a charm for them in it.