Muslim Scholars - Actually I have two questions. Was his correct name Mohammed II or was it Mahomet II or Mehmed II?
My next question is was he Black or White: The reason for my confusion is these two very different depictions of him entering Constantinople after his conquest in 1453.
.
Benjamin Jean Joseph Constant (1845-1902) Entrance of Mohammed II into Constantinople Oil on canvas
.
The Entry of Mahomet II into Constantinople, by Benjamin Jean Joseph Constant
Jean-Joseph Benjamin-Constant (also written: Benjamin Constant), born Jean-Joseph Constant, (10 June 1845, Paris - 26 May 1902, Paris) was a French painter and etcher best known for his Oriental subjects and portraits.
Benjamin-Constant studied at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, where he was a pupil of Alexandre Cabanel. A journey to Morocco in 1872 strongly influenced his early artistic development and lead him to produce Romantic scenes under the spell of Orientalism. Among his noted works in this vein are "Last Rebels", "Justice in the Harem" (both in the Luxembourg Gallery), "Les Chérifas," and "Moroccan Prisoners" (Bordeaux). His large canvas, "The Entrance of Mahomet II into Constantinople" (Toulouse Museum), received a medal in 1876.
.
Then there is THIS!
Mehmed II enters Constantinople by Fausto Zonaro (1854-1929)
.
Fausto Zonaro was born in Masi, a municipality in the Province of Padua, in what was then the Austrian Empire, in 1854. He was the eldest child of the mason Maurizio Zonaro and his wife Elisabetta Bertoncin. Maurizio Zonaro intended that his son Fausto should follow him in his profession. Fausto Zonaro however, showed a great ability at drawing even at a very young age. So, with his parents’ consent, he was enrolled in the Technical Institute in Lendinara and after that in Verona at the Academy of Fine Arts run by Napoleone Nani.
Later he opened a small art school in the city of Venice, but his work often caused him to spend time in Naples as well. He felt no clear direction in his life at that time. The turning point in Zonaro’s career occurred however in 1891, when, together with Elisabetta Pante, his former Venetian pupil who he had fallen in love with, he decided to travel with her to the capital of the Ottoman Empire, Constantinople, now known as Istanbul. They were partly inspired to make this trip by having read Edmondo de Amicis’ travel book Constantinopoli.
In 1892 Zonaro and Pante married, and lived in the part of Constantinople known as Pera. In Constantinople, over time he came to the attention of the aristocratic circles, and obtained from them orders for his works. One of these was Teşrifat Nazırı Münir Paşa who invited him to visit Yıldız Palace and meet the prestigious Ottoman artist Osman Hamdi Bey. He was then employed in teaching painting to the wife of Münir Paşa, and in this way, Zonaro and his wife, got to know the important artistic figures of Constantinople of that time.
In 1896 he was nominated as the court painter (Ottoman Turkish: Ressam-ı Hazret-i Şehriyari) thanks to the intervention of the Russian ambassador who had presented the ruling sultan Abdulhamid II with Zonaro’s work Il reggimento imperiale di Ertugrul sul ponte di Galata (in English: The Imperial Regiment of the Ertugrul on the Galata Bridge), which Abdulhamid II had then purchased. This painting is of the crew of the Ottoman warship Ertugrul which had just been sent off on a visit to Japan. The sultan later requested that Zonaro, as court painter, paint other works for him, in particular a series of paintings depicting the time of the 15th-century Ottoman sultan, Mehmed II. Holding the position of court painter, Zonaro viewed himself as the successor to the Venetian painter Gentile Bellini, who had been commissioned by Mehmed II to paint his portrait over 300 years earlier.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^I can't even give you a "Nice Try" on that one Ass-hole. That was really weak.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
The Black Exotic: Tradition and Ethnography in Nineteenth-Century Orientalist Art Authors:Childs, Adrienne Louise
Art History and Archaeology Thesis University of Maryland
Abstract: This study of select works by Orientalist artists Jean-Léon Gérôme and Charles Cordier charts the trajectory of the idea of the black exotic and investigates the symbolism of black figures in Orientalist painting and sculpture. Representations of blacks in Orientalist art served a complex and nuanced function as nineteenth-century European artists fashioned the exotic. At the nexus of traditional tropes of blackness and the new science of ethnography, they were a critical tool used to construct an imagined Orient within the context of Orientalism--the phenomenal passion for the exotic in the nineteenth century. Blacks were multifaceted figures that evoked sexuality, servitude, degradation, and primitive culture while providing decorative beauty and the allure of difference. The trope of the exotic black is rooted in a tradition of representing Africans dating back to the Italian Renaissance. By the nineteenth century ethnographic approaches to race permeated Orientalist ideologies and affected a qualitative shift in how black figures operated in visual culture. Through a critical analysis of the relationship between exoticism and blackness, this study addresses the need for a more specialized interpretation of how attitudes towards race were encoded in nineteenth-century visual arts.
_____________________________________________
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Sultan Mehmed II
Gentile Bellini "The Sultan Mehmet II" (1480)
medal 16th c.
start with earlier portraits first
Posted by Landry (Member # 18040) on :
Hi Dude
I think his name was Mohammed II, who conquered Constantinople and he was a Muslim King.It was his conquest that made land locked between Europe and Asia. And this made European kings to discover a new sea route to South East Aisa.
Benjamin Jean Joseph Constant "The Entrance of Mahomet II into Constantinople" (Toulouse Museum), received a medal in 1876.
quote:
Flea bitten Feline:
Archeological Science tells us that THIS is a Hebrew.
Yet the White Man says that THIS is a Hebrew!
Bottom line:
The White Man Lies! Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
I am just curious as to what it matters in the bigger picture....if he was Black, what difference does it make now....if he was 'white', what difference does it make now....
Respectfully, I am pretty sure by now that we all here on ES know the 'white' man lies...that fact has been told time and time again over hundreds of years by non-'white' people across the globe warning ones of the 'white' man's "forked tongue"...if people are still foolish enough to beLIEve everything outta the 'white' man's mouth, that is their right and more importantly, their problem....
htp
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Look up Etymology of Ottoman at Dictionary.com
1585, from Fr., from It. Ottomano, from Ar. 'Uthmani "of or belonging to Arabic masc. proper name 'Uthman," which in Turk. is pronounced Othman (see Osmanli), name of the founder of the dynasty and empire. Ending alt. in It. by formation of a new false singular, because -i was a pl. inflection in It. Byron used the more correct form Othman, and a few writers have followed him. The type of couch so called (1806) because one reclined on it, which was associated with Eastern customs (see couch).
Osmanli Look up Osmanli at Dictionary.com
"an Ottoman Turk," 1813, from Turk. Osmanli "of or pertaining to Osman," from Osman, founder of the Ottoman dynasty (he reigned 1259-1326); his name is the Turkish pronunciation of Arabic Uthman. This is the native word where English generally uses Ottoman.
Sounds like Osman I, might have actually been a Black Arab. Therefore Mahomet II, also would have been a Black Arab. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
TruthAndRights - You give the average Black person Waaay too much credit.
It's not that they're stupid, it's just that they don't know any better - and White people certainly aren't going to educate them.
This thread is a perfect example: Most people understand that modern Turks are a "mixed-Race" people - But mixed with WHO?
Read ANY White Man Book on the Ottoman Empire and it's beginnings, and you will NEVER see the words "Black People" mentioned.
Yet of course, Anatolia was one of the founding Black Human cultures. Today it still holds the oldest carved stone architecture. It was home to some of the most famous ancient cities like Troy. It may have been the original home of the Etruscans. It was certainly the original home of the Hebrews - and yet the fact that the people were Black never seems to come up.
So in answer to you question; Yes it does matter, the world must constantly be told that the vile Albino, the White Man, is a Liar.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
So in answer to you question; Yes it does matter, the world must constantly be told that the vile Albino, the White Man, is a Liar. [/QB]
that's why the the etymology on dictionary.com is a lie It was written by albinos
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:...that the vile Albino...
Respectfully, a better choice of words is in order here....because we currently have not a shortage of Albino AFRICAN PEOPLE...OUR PEOPLE...and they are NOT vile people....and they are not 'white' people as we know 'white' people...whom I prefer to call 'pale people' rather than 'white' people...but that's just my own personal preference....
Now, had you worded it something like "....the vile 'white' man...." or "...the vile descendants of Albinos, the 'white' man..." or something along those lines, that would be different....I will not dump our African albino brothers and sisters in the same pot with 'white' people...but again, that is my personal preference, as I am one who strives for Black Love and Black Unity for Africans at home (Africa) and abroad (the Diaspora).
htp
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
you have to understand Mike's a little primitive
^^^^the current "real Jesus" appearance according to the wicked white man
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
TruthAndRights - The Albinos of Africa and other places ADMIT that they are Albinos.
They do no harm to others, on the contrary, they are often victims. They are blameless and therefore just Albinos.
The Dravidian Albinos are another case entirely. They do NOT admit that they are Albinos, they routinely do great acts of violence to themselves and to others. And they are by far, the lying-est creatures on the planet.
To simply call them Albinos, would be a disservice to Albinos. Therefore I call them "Vile Albinos" it seems appropriate.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: [QB] TruthAndRights - The Albinos of Africa and other places ADMIT that they are Albinos.
They do no harm to others, on the contrary, they are often victims. They are blameless and therefore just Albinos.
they should leave Africa, organize come back and punish the people that were trying to chop them up
that would be justice right?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^I hope you pay close attention to the Lioness posts. Though he/she is rather crude with it, the modus is typical. And it's totally unplanned, completely spontaneous.
When confronted with resistance, they can't help but respond with violence. When confronted with the truth, they can't help but lie.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: they should leave Africa, organize come back and punish the people that were trying to chop them up
that would be justice right?
Lioness, I'm sure that you don't know it, but those are probably the most honest words ever spoken by a White person.
And just think, if those very justified feelings had been expressed in the beginning. When the Dravidian Albinos first returned from Central Asia, and were first repatriated with their normal cousins in India 3,500 years ago. How different the world would be.
Because you are right, that would have been justice. But please remember, all Blacks did NOT do those things.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
I quote here from the Rig Veda. As you can see, reconciliation was not utmost in the Arians mind, but the desire for vengeance was!
He, much invoked, hath slain Dasyus and Simyus, after his wont, and laid them low with arrows. The mighty Thunderer with his fair-complexioned friends won the land, the sunlight, and the waters.
Blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates.
Active and bright have they come forth, impetuous in speed like bulls, Driving the black skin far away.
His kine their Lord hath shown, e'en Vrtra's slayer, through the black hosts he passed with red attendants.
Indra the Vrtra-slayer, Fort-destroyer, scattered the Dasa hosts who dwelt in darkness. {Prof. Uthaya Naidu translates this as "who sprang from a black womb."}
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The Black Exotic: Tradition and Ethnography in Nineteenth-Century Orientalist Art Authors:Childs, Adrienne Louise
Art History and Archaeology Thesis University of Maryland
Abstract: This study of select works by Orientalist artists Jean-Léon Gérôme and Charles Cordier charts the trajectory of the idea of the black exotic and investigates the symbolism of black figures in Orientalist painting and sculpture. Representations of blacks in Orientalist art served a complex and nuanced function as nineteenth-century European artists fashioned the exotic. At the nexus of traditional tropes of blackness and the new science of ethnography, they were a critical tool used to construct an imagined Orient within the context of Orientalism--the phenomenal passion for the exotic in the nineteenth century. Blacks were multifaceted figures that evoked sexuality, servitude, degradation, and primitive culture while providing decorative beauty and the allure of difference. The trope of the exotic black is rooted in a tradition of representing Africans dating back to the Italian Renaissance. By the nineteenth century ethnographic approaches to race permeated Orientalist ideologies and affected a qualitative shift in how black figures operated in visual culture. Through a critical analysis of the relationship between exoticism and blackness, this study addresses the need for a more specialized interpretation of how attitudes towards race were encoded in nineteenth-century visual arts.
_____________________________________________
Where are these selected works?
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^I hope you pay close attention to the Lioness posts. Though he/she is rather crude with it, the modus is typical. And it's totally unplanned, completely spontaneous.
When confronted with resistance, they can't help but respond with violence. When confronted with the truth, they can't help but lie.
Although I pretty much overlook him/her, I do pree them to a degree...no different than I pree the other posts here to a degree...but that poster isn't much different from a LOT of you all here when it comes to attitude: sounding like petulant rude schoolyard children throwing temper tantrums when someone disagrees with your opinions/facts/points of views...some just more rude than others...and there is no color-line drawn on that one....
You have your own form of crudeness to be paying attention to, before you worry about someone else's crudeness, no disrespect intended....I am not criticizing you- mi jus ah talk tuh yuh big ooman tuh big man still....
htp
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Muslim Scholars - Actually I have two questions. Was his correct name Mohammed II or was it Mahomet II or Mehmed II?
My next question is was he Black or White: The reason for my confusion is these two very different depictions of him entering Constantinople after his conquest in 1453.
.
Benjamin Jean Joseph Constant (1845-1902) Entrance of Mohammed II into Constantinople Oil on canvas
.
The Entry of Mahomet II into Constantinople, by Benjamin Jean Joseph Constant
Jean-Joseph Benjamin-Constant (also written: Benjamin Constant), born Jean-Joseph Constant, (10 June 1845, Paris - 26 May 1902, Paris) was a French painter and etcher best known for his Oriental subjects and portraits.
Benjamin-Constant studied at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, where he was a pupil of Alexandre Cabanel. A journey to Morocco in 1872 strongly influenced his early artistic development and lead him to produce Romantic scenes under the spell of Orientalism. Among his noted works in this vein are "Last Rebels", "Justice in the Harem" (both in the Luxembourg Gallery), "Les Chérifas," and "Moroccan Prisoners" (Bordeaux). His large canvas, "The Entrance of Mahomet II into Constantinople" (Toulouse Museum), received a medal in 1876.
.
Then there is THIS!
Mehmed II enters Constantinople by Fausto Zonaro (1854-1929)
.
Fausto Zonaro was born in Masi, a municipality in the Province of Padua, in what was then the Austrian Empire, in 1854. He was the eldest child of the mason Maurizio Zonaro and his wife Elisabetta Bertoncin. Maurizio Zonaro intended that his son Fausto should follow him in his profession. Fausto Zonaro however, showed a great ability at drawing even at a very young age. So, with his parents’ consent, he was enrolled in the Technical Institute in Lendinara and after that in Verona at the Academy of Fine Arts run by Napoleone Nani.
Later he opened a small art school in the city of Venice, but his work often caused him to spend time in Naples as well. He felt no clear direction in his life at that time. The turning point in Zonaro’s career occurred however in 1891, when, together with Elisabetta Pante, his former Venetian pupil who he had fallen in love with, he decided to travel with her to the capital of the Ottoman Empire, Constantinople, now known as Istanbul. They were partly inspired to make this trip by having read Edmondo de Amicis’ travel book Constantinopoli.
In 1892 Zonaro and Pante married, and lived in the part of Constantinople known as Pera. In Constantinople, over time he came to the attention of the aristocratic circles, and obtained from them orders for his works. One of these was Teşrifat Nazırı Münir Paşa who invited him to visit Yıldız Palace and meet the prestigious Ottoman artist Osman Hamdi Bey. He was then employed in teaching painting to the wife of Münir Paşa, and in this way, Zonaro and his wife, got to know the important artistic figures of Constantinople of that time.
In 1896 he was nominated as the court painter (Ottoman Turkish: Ressam-ı Hazret-i Şehriyari) thanks to the intervention of the Russian ambassador who had presented the ruling sultan Abdulhamid II with Zonaro’s work Il reggimento imperiale di Ertugrul sul ponte di Galata (in English: The Imperial Regiment of the Ertugrul on the Galata Bridge), which Abdulhamid II had then purchased. This painting is of the crew of the Ottoman warship Ertugrul which had just been sent off on a visit to Japan. The sultan later requested that Zonaro, as court painter, paint other works for him, in particular a series of paintings depicting the time of the 15th-century Ottoman sultan, Mehmed II. Holding the position of court painter, Zonaro viewed himself as the successor to the Venetian painter Gentile Bellini, who had been commissioned by Mehmed II to paint his portrait over 300 years earlier.
Mike111 are you sure that you pasted the correct picture? That first picture looks like Morocco and Moroccans. It's a Moroccan mosque and the people in the picture are Moroccans. I think there was a mixup somewhere. Apparently it's a picture of the entrance of the Moroccan Alawite king Mohamed II, who reigned from 1736–1738. And he is not entering Constantinople - he is in Morocco.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ LMAO...Mike111 and his picture spams
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry - You may be right, that's why I asked for help. Everywhere has the two Constant paintings under the same name, but the first one is different from the other two. I was thinking that it might be a second scene in Constantinople, but then again it might not. The name refers to many Sultans, but only one conquered Constantinople.
* Mehmed II "the Conqueror", (1432 – 1481), Sultan of the Ottoman Empire * Muhammad II of Khwarezm, ruler of the Khwarezmid Empire from 1200 to 1220 * Muhammad II of Córdoba, fourth Caliph of Cordoba, of the Umayyad dynasty in the Al-Andalus (Moorish Iberia) * Muhammad II of Aghlabids (d.875), eighth Emir of the Aghlabids in Ifriqiya (864-875) * Muhammad II ibn al-Husayn (1811 - 1859), eleventh leader of the Husainid Dynasty and ruler of Tunisia * Mohamed II of the Maldives, Sultan of Maldives from 1467 to 1481 * Muhammad II of Khwarezm, ruler of the Khwarezmid Empire from 1200 to 1220 * Mahmud II of Great Seljuk (died 1131), proclaimed himself the Seljuk sultan of Baghdad * Mehmed II of Kerman, List of Seljuk rulers of Kerman (1041–1187)
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^ LMAO...Mike111 and his picture spams
Jari, like anguish, you are an ignorant little ass-hole. You have nothing to offer, so stay quiet.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry - With your edit, I believe that you have solved the first mystery.
What now of the second mystery; Which painting is the correct depiction of Mehmed II?
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: awlaadberry - With your edit, I believe that you have solved the first mystery.
What now of the second mystery; Which painting is the correct depiction of Mehmed II?
Glad to be of help Mike. Concerning your second question, the second picture is apparently that of the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed/Mehmet/Mohamed II. The second and third pictures are basically the same.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: awlaadberry - With your edit, I believe that you have solved the first mystery.
What now of the second mystery; Which painting is the correct depiction of Mehmed II?
Glad to be of help Mike. Concerning your second question, the second picture is apparently that of the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed/Mehmet/Mohamed II. The second and third pictures are basically the same.
Well not really awlaadberry:
The top picture has a Black Mehmed/Mehmet/Mohamed II, with mostly mixed-race soldiers.
The second picture has a White Mehmed/Mehmet/Mohamed II, with White soldiers.
The uniforms are different, and so is the flag.
Interestingly, even the Horses are opposites.
Which one is true?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^If it's any help, the Benjamin Jean Joseph Constant painting at the top was done in about 1876.
The Fausto Zonaro painting on the bottom was done in about 1903.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
LOL...Both painting have a white Turk Mohamet...its obvious if you compare the black soldier to the man on the horse who Im guessing is Mohamet II.
As I said Mike111 and his picture Spams..
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Damn Boy, not only is your mind fuched-up, so are your eyes. Stupid and almost blind, what a pitiful combination.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Mike is a fucking idiot. we all take it for granted now.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Mike look at the first painting compare the Black soldier to the right to the person on the horse. Its obvious the person on the Horse is not the same color as the black soldier.
Come on Mike for once use your head...Compare the Soldier to the Horse rider...Is the difference in skin not OBVIOUS.
Also Mike the first painting has a gloomy feel, every thing is in tones of Gray, As an artist trust me the Artist WOULD HAVE made the Man on the Horse the same shade as the soldier if they both were black.
An artists goal no matter how good they are is simplicity, The Best artists is one that can make the message easy to the observer..
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Lioness stop mucking about!! This is not the same as a white kid coping an urban-AA hair style
The remains found at Lakish:The excavacation uncovered a mass of human bones,which was estamated to from the remains of fifteen hundred individuals..remains of 695 skulls were brought to London by the British expidition...curiously,the crania indicate a close resemblance to the population of Egypt at this time...the relationships found suggest that the population of the town in 700 B.C was entirely of Egyptian origin..they show further,that the population of lakish was probably derived from upper Egypt.James e Brunson http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=bag&action=display&thread=83&page=6 ^For those who want more insights into the African population of the area.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Now that the really Brainy guys are here, now it's a party!
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Mike is a fucking idiot. we all take it for granted now.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: LOL...Both painting have a white Turk Mohamet...its obvious if you compare the black soldier to the man on the horse who Im guessing is Mohamet II.
As I said Mike111 and his picture Spams..
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
Mike Im not even dogging you for real look at the Painting compare the Black Soldier to the Horse Rider..Seriously...I thought he was black too but look..its obvious man.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Mike Im not even dogging you for real look at the Painting compare the Black Soldier to the Horse Rider..Seriously...I thought he was black too but look..its obvious man.
Jari - That sounds really White.
So you think all "REAL" Black people are "VERY" dark eh.
So what's the deal, are you just stupid, or are you really a White person?
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
STFU Mike, that come back sounds so stupid even by your standards. Admit you tripped up again with your own picture spams. Recall Great Jew calling you out on another of your picture spam threads.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
anguishofbeingstupid - You were thinking the same as jari, weren't you? Two idiots with bad eyesight - what next.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Mike Im not even dogging you for real look at the Painting compare the Black Soldier to the Horse Rider..Seriously...I thought he was black too but look..its obvious man.
Jari - That sounds really White.
So you think all "REAL" Black people are "VERY" dark eh.
So what's the deal, are you just stupid, or are you really a White person?
Mike Im Done bro, ask Alwaadberry even he says the Painting are the Same dude...only person here with delusions is you..Keep on with your Picture spams bro.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
anguishofbeingstupid and jari, this is not for you. You are both too stupid, ignorant, or both, to be bother with.
However there may be some who are unfamiliar with the work of these old painters. Though they were White men, some were quite good at capturing the features, and very wide range coloration's of Black people.
I gotta give the White boys credit on this one, these paintings are just fuching Beautiful! Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
Though I believe that the scenes in the second and third pictures are basically the same, I do understand what Mike means. The person on the horse in the second picture doesn't appear to have the complexion of a Turk. I don't know if it's because as Jari says, the painting has a gloomy feel and every thing is in tones of gray or the painter actually wanted to paint him dark (but obviously not as dark as the soldier to his right).
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Mike I don't understand it.
I posted pictures of Mahomet II as far back as the as a painting from the same century,the 15th, he was born in yet for some reason only 19th century paintings 300 years later are valid to you. Case closed he was a cave beast.
(evolved from ancient Turk negroes)
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Mike I don't understand it.
I posted pictures of Mahomet II as far back as the as a painting from the same century,the 15th, he was born in yet for some reason only 19th century paintings 300 years later are valid to you. Case closed he was a cave beast.
(evolved from ancient Turk negroes)
.
In September 1479 Gentile was sent by the Venetian Senate to the Ottoman capital Constantinople as part of the peace settlement between Venice and the Turks. His role was not only as a visiting painter in an exotic locale, but also as a cultural ambassador for Venice. This was important to Mehmed II, as he was particularly interested in the art and culture of Italy, and he attempted on several occasions to have himself portrayed by Italian artists.
He finally reached his goal with Gentile, who is believed to have painted the portrait of Mehmed II now in the National Gallery, London, (but largely overpainted). It has been noticed that the portrait is like one of the figures in a painting by Marco Palmezzano, Jesus among the Doctors in the Temple (Brisighella, near Forlì and Ravenna). So the dating and authorship of the portrait by Bellini have been placed in question.
(When it comes to any type of history related to Race, only a fool would believe the White Man). Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
II Mehmet, Fatih
Turkish Family by Albrecht Dürer
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
Anne-Louis Girodet de Roussy-Trioson. Portrait of Jean-Baptiste Belley, Deputy of Santo Domingo to Convention of France. 1797. Oil on canvas. The Hermitage, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Mike111 what are getting at?
I thought your usual tactic was to say that the Turks were a bunch of wicked white men who hijacked Islam.
Now you seem to think one of them, Mehmed II might have been black.
What are you working on a new hair brained theory of some kind?
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
