| Author |
Message |
|
Miguel T
|
 Posted: Mon 12 May, 2014 3:27 pm Post subject: Turkish Armour of the 17th and 18th Centuries |
 |
|
Hello everyone! I'm new to the forums, and I'd like to ask if any of you would know if the turkish cavalry would still be using armour from the late 17th century (Around the time of the Battle of Vienna) to the early 18th (when the turks fought against Prince Eugene of Savoy and Peter the Great). If so, does anyone knows any picture of pieces of turkish armour from that time? The overwhelming majority of the armour I've seen is from the 15th and 16th centuries.
My best regards.
|
|
  |
 |
Eric S
|
| Posted: Wed 14 May, 2014 10:11 pm Post subject: Re: Turkish Armour of the 17th and 18th Centuries |
|
|
| Miguel T wrote: | Hello everyone! I'm new to the forums, and I'd like to ask if any of you would know if the turkish cavalry would still be using armour from the late 17th century (Around the time of the Battle of Vienna) to the early 18th (when the turks fought against Prince Eugene of Savoy and Peter the Great). If so, does anyone knows any picture of pieces of turkish armour from that time? The overwhelming majority of the armour I've seen is from the 15th and 16th centuries.
My best regards. |
Miguel, the Ottoman armor was huge, it was composed of fighters from many different counties and cultures. Even in earlier times armor was only worn by a small fraction of the total amount of soldiers in the Ottoman army, this can be seen in period prints and drawings. In later years as the Ottomans modernized their forces in the European style, armor was totally abandoned.
During the period you mention some soldiers employed by the Ottomans did wear armor, take the battle of Vienna as an example, the Polish cavalry (Hussars) certainly wore armor and the opposing Ottoman cavalry would have worn some elements of traditional Ottoman armor (helmet or mail hood, a mail shirt and possibly a cuirass (krug), arm , thigh and shin guards). The average Ottoman soldier probably could not afford armor, possibly a mail shirt and maybe a mail hood but armor was expensive and they were not well paid.
From what I have read and seen, it does not look like the Ottomans updated their armor style much from the 1500s, and while existing Ottoman armor is commonly dated to that time period it is quite possible that armor made in the same style but constructed at a later date (1600s) has been mis-identified. The Ottomans also had vast stores of armor and weapons, these may have been refurbished and reissued to certain groups of soldiers during the later period wars.
Here is a link with some good information on the battle of Vienna.
http://deadliestblogpage.wordpress.com/2012/0...d-hussars/
Here is a link with some Ottoman armor pictures.
http://www.pinterest.com/samuraiantiques/indo-persian-armor/
This Ottoman armor is commonly described a "16th century" but how do we know that it was not actually made (or just reused) during the 17th century?
|
|
 |
|
|
Henrik Zoltan Toth
|
| Posted: Thu 15 May, 2014 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
You have to look if djebedji regiments were mentioned in those sources. If they are, then you have the armoured riders like the one in the picture above.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Thu 15 May, 2014 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Henrik Zoltan Toth wrote: | | You have to look if djebedji regiments were mentioned in those sources. If they are, then you have the armoured riders like the one in the picture above. |
This quote mentions Ottoman cavalry being ordered to attack "Sobieski’s horsemen", I can not image that they did not wear armor of some type while attacking and being attacked by armored Polish cavalry.
| Quote: | By 4PM the Polish advance had reached the flat ground necessary for a successful charge. Now the Hussars moved to the front, through the intervals in the infantry line. Their feathered wings and bright lance pennants fluttering in the breeze, they were by all accounts a splendid and impressive sight.
First a few companies were detailed to probe the enemy’s center, where they succeeded in disordering the Turkish first line. As the Poles withdrew, the Ottoman commander on the Turkish left must have thought the Poles were now vulnerable to counter-attack; and ordered the Ottoman cavalry on that wing to attack Sobieski’s horsemen. |
| Quote: | the Hussars broke into full gallop, lances lowering like “stalks of rye in the wind”. Into the oncoming Turkish cavalry, Sipahis and akinci, they tore!
A witness to the charge wrote:
“No sooner does a Hussar lower his lance than a Turk is impaled on its spike; disordering and terrifying the foe. That blow cannot be avoided or deflected…Oft transfixing two persons at a time. Others flee in eager haste… Like flies in a frenzy!” |
Sipahis and akinci refers to Ottoman cavalry units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
| Posted: Fri 16 May, 2014 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wouldn't be so sure that unarmoured cavalry wouldn't attack armoured foes, since Napoleonic light cavalry (hussars, chevaulegers, lancers, and the like) were often quite willing to charge cuirassiers and dragoons, especially if they could do so from the opponent's flank or rear. That being said, sipahis going without armour sounds rather weird to me, even in the 17th or early 18th century since I have vague recollections of armoured Ottoman cavalry facing off against some cuirassiers under Eugene of Savoy in the very late 17th or even early 18th century. There might even be accounts of them adopting European armour to some degree, though I'm less sure of that since I can't even remember where I read that from.
BTW, this image was once posted in an older thread; it's said to be a depiction of Ottoman sipahis in Vienna (1683), but I find that attribution dodgy since there's no detailed information about the source even though the shape of the horses looks right for late 17th-century European art. It could, of course, be a relatively modern (19th- or 20th-century) redrawing of a contemporary or near-contemporary European artwork. I'd say it's a pretty accurate description of what 17th- or 18th-century Europeans thought sipahis looked like but I don't know whether it's a reliable source for what the sipahis really looked like.
(And yes, the one on the right looks like he has a 15th-century Gothic cuirass on, albeit flattened out of shape. It could just as well be a poor depiction of Ottoman armour with a central "mirror" plate and several other plates arranged radially around it -- perhaps the type more commonly known under the Russian names "krug" or "zertsalo.")
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Fri 16 May, 2014 9:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lafayette C Curtis wrote: | | I wouldn't be so sure that unarmoured cavalry wouldn't attack armoured foes, since Napoleonic light cavalry (hussars, chevaulegers, lancers, and the like) were often quite willing to charge cuirassiers and dragoons, especially if they could do so from the opponent's flank or rear. That being said, sipahis going without armour sounds rather weird to me, even in the 17th or early 18th century since I have vague recollections of armoured Ottoman cavalry facing off against some cuirassiers under Eugene of Savoy in the very late 17th or even early 18th century. There might even be accounts of them adopting European armour to some degree, though I'm less sure of that since I can't even remember where I read that from. |
Lafayette, I can not image Ottoman cavalry fighting unarmored against anyone, they seem to have been very rooted in tradition.
| Quote: | | BTW, this image was once posted in an older thread; it's said to be a depiction of Ottoman sipahis in Vienna (1683), but I find that attribution dodgy since there's no detailed information about the source even though the shape of the horses looks right for late 17th-century European art. It could, of course, be a relatively modern (19th- or 20th-century) redrawing of a contemporary or near-contemporary European artwork. I'd say it's a pretty accurate description of what 17th- or 18th-century Europeans thought sipahis looked like but I don't know whether it's a reliable source for what the sipahis really looked like. |
I have not been able to pin down the exact time and place of this image so I did not post it, even though it is said to be a depiction of Ottoman cavalry from the battle of Vienna in some sources.
| Quote: | | (And yes, the one on the right looks like he has a 15th-century Gothic cuirass on, albeit flattened out of shape. It could just as well be a poor depiction of Ottoman armour with a central "mirror" plate and several other plates arranged radially around it -- perhaps the type more commonly known under the Russian names "krug" or "zertsalo.") |
The one armor certainIy looks like a European cuirass, I would not be surprised if captured armor was worn. As for the word "krug", this seems to be the generally accepted term for the very recognizable Ottoman cuirass, I have not heard it called a Russian word, I know "zertsalo" as the Russian name for this style of armor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic