asim

Owie! Ye gods, but that's an impressive ... ornament.

What's the context of the art? This is mighty interesting. *grin*

They are, according to the caption, period Dervishes, believe it or not. The pieces of the text I have has notes on them from Nicholay, as well as a description, unattributed in the notes I have, on a similar group, the Torlaquis. The description given in the text for the latter matches better than for the Dervishes:
"[they] covered their nakedness with goatskins or sheepskins in the same manner as the Dervishes…branded their temples…arms and legs were bare, but on their head they had high cylindrical hats of white pleated felt."
The picture itself is from "Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek Codex Vindobonenis 8615 Vienna circa 1586.", described by And as "Executed by the historian Johannes Lewenklaw for his book on Ottoman History, this album consist of 185 folios containing numerous colour illustrations measuring 493x365."

Hot damn!! I love it! It's better than bloody head fences and diagonal yellow-ducky striped fabric put together! *dances with evil glee*

Wow! And, uh, ow! I've never seen genital piercing and prayer beads together like that! :-P

The world is full of amazing things. *grin*
I fully expect someone will come along to build such a persona in a few years...I've opened up a Pandora's Box, I have. :)

Why would you care about authenticating and documenting
something unless you wanted to enter it in an A&S competition?
I must say that a period piercing A&S competition would
be something quite amusing or frightening depending on the people
with whom you play.

Why would you care about authenticating and documenting
something unless you wanted to enter it in an A&S competition?

Because it's fun to fuck with people's expectations.
And it can be fun to play with a "strict" ruleset -- if one so wishes.

Why would you care about authenticating and documenting
something unless you wanted to enter it in an A&S competition?


Because you find it challenging to limit yourself only to that which is historically accurate?
Because you get a kick out of being as perfect a representation of your persona as possible?
Because you have an interest in other cultures and like to learn about them?

Documentation is not the end-result, documentation is a *tool* we use to help us achieve certain ends. Entering A&S competitions is only one possible goal... those I listed above are also possibilities.

K.

I see a lot of pictures used as documentation, but how can you confirm a picture as historically accurate besides confirmation to the the period literature? I mean there are pictures of all sorts of things.

The one thing that bothered me about the picture was the size of the jewelry relative to the size of the bits that were pierced. Do the proportions say more about things as they were or as people wished them to be or people wanted them to be in the context of the work for aesthetic reasons?

[Reposted -- the last version has some weird line breaking going on...]

Before I start, a note: It's my interpreation, not Lady Katherine's. You'll be wanting to take me to task, not her, for my statement tht this is a source of period documentation.

how can you confirm a picture as historically accurate besides confirmation to the the period literature?

Allow me to flip that around, first -- how does one know that any period literature is accurate? After all, it's much easier to lie in writings than to lie in pictures.
Having said that, the base standards of the SCA allow for such an interpretation. We regularly allow names based upon a single reference in a period text, for instance. The basic question is not how many sources, but the credibility thereof.
I can say, with my limited research into matters Ottoman, that this picture has the "ring of truth" around it. I do not know the artist/historian in question, but his depictions of life in other parts of ISTANBUL IN THE... are similar to other works I've seen, both inside.
There is, in additional, a tradition of piercing that's not seen (so far as I know) in the Maghrib or Central Asia, but is seen in the Indian sub-continent -- I know a couple of people with some knowledge on it, and I hope they'll stop by and say "Hi!" Since I know that part of the basic concepts of the Sufi tradition are heavily influenced by Indian religious concepts, I can presume that these people are similarly influenced, and we know that concepts of nudity on the Indian sub-continent are quite different than those in Central Asia.
On top of that, we have to be careful to NOT assume that these European writers/artists are automatically anti-arab, in the style of the Orentalists writers. Orentalistism, as a stereotype, came about (if you follow the concept as laid down by Edward Said) as a post-period reaction to these early tales, and the growing power of the West. At this point, the Ottoman Empire was a real, creditable threat to Europe, and many of the writers were honor-bound to report things As They Truly Were, not to pad for an audience back home.

Does that make more sense?

As far as the size of the jewlery -- it's not at all out of the question. If the point was that the person was celibate, what did he care? And my point isn't the size, it's the presence

Hi!

I can tell you that male genital piercings are referenced in at least one case in the Kama Sutra, which is assuredly pre-period but was followed to varying degrees in Indian cultures throughout period. It seems like the piercing *may* be an apadravya (the male piercing mentioned in the KS) with a touch of artistic license taken. The size of the jewelry in question doesn't particularly shock or make me question the validity of the artist's representation since it's the same size as the other earrings, which seem quite reasonable in size (Says the girl with inch-wide earlobe holes...)

Once upon a time I desperately wanted to write a document on period body modification practices but I just got overwhelemed by the information and gave up. I'll be sure to file this away in the memory banks for if I ever get inspired to actually finish it.

You're absolutely right that pictures from medieval and renaissance times can be incorrect. One of the things we have to do when using them for documentation is look at them critically, and try to figure out what might be inaccurate and why. For instance, there's the issue of "allegorical" paintings which are meant to tell a story and so may have the people in "fancy dress", which means it's not accurate for costuming documentation purposes. Or perhaps you might want to consider the fact that artists use different colours when painting than are available as dyes... this is often raised as an issue when looking at some manuscript illuminations that use vibrant cobalt blue, for instance.

In the case of this picture, and the guy's Prince Albert (a post-19th-century term for the genital piercing he has) I would say that the relevant thing to consider is "who drew this picture, and what was their attitude towards the subjects?" If the artist would have considered the subjects of the picture to be "savages" or "barbarians" he may have made the picture more outrageous to prove his point.

But, on the other hand, I have had personal experience with Prince Alberts up to zero gauge, which is almost a centimetre thick, and I'm pretty sure there is no physical impediment to stretching up to the apparent 3/4" or so going through this guy's penis (note that the ring is thinner where it goes through him, and thicker at the base). It would be stretched up gradually, and the guy would get used to the weight, and although his penis might stretch a bit it probably wouldn't be outrageous... those "581%" claims you probably get in email just aren't realistic :)

In modern piercing circles, genital piercings over 0ga are unusual because the jewelry isn't available as "standard", and it's expensive to get surgical stainless steel crafted by hand. But in the middle ages, the issues of mass production wouldn't apply. OK, they wouldn't have had surgical stainless steel either... I wonder what metal they would have used? Gold seems obvious, but this picture shows something of a silver colour. And, hey, this guy wouldn't have to go through an airport metal detector, which is the other impediment to huge piercings these days :)

So, my take on this picture in particular is "physically possible, but probably a slight exaggeration on the part of the artist."

K.

i don't think that counts for tuchux documentation. other than the pierced guy who's only wearing his drape,
the figures are all wearing too much clothing, and their skirts cover way too much of their asses and legs. :)

I'm trying to cut the bastards some slack, don'tcha know. *grin*

[1] Tuchux are a group of people who play with, but are not part of, the SCA. They tend to wander around, mostly at Pennsic, wearing loincloths of various brevity and not much else.

*laugh*

That's one of the nicest way's I've ever heard their garb described.

-the redhead-