Talk:Flags of the Ottoman Empire

message: Whats wrong with the post-1844 flag? All references I could find refer to the post-1844 as only official standard flag of the Ottomans. I haven't seen the flag depicted in the poor quality image at the top of this article in any references. --Yodakii 16:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: post-1844

message: All the western referances that talk about the Ottoman Flag is incomplete. During Tanzimat, with the influence of western powers, they tried to reach a form of unity in a state that is as structured as a fractal image. Ottoman state was designed against a single concept to compansate the differences. Their millet notion is a good symbolism to cover this concept. The reflection of this multiple image was reflected to their flags, not to a single flag. By the way for the thinking minds, the current meaning of flag do not translate one to one to ottoman empire use of the word (literrally). For the flag under the ottoman page, we refer to Turkey's presidential insignia, as a source. That shape is accepted as the official flag of Ottomans, by the Republic of Turkeys presidental law. Other western sources, some I have chance to read, shows a general bais towards Muslim Ottomans, which the word by itself acts as an barrier to their credibility, if you know what I mean. I hope this explanation is good enough.
:Sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying there never was an official Ottoman flag? And that the Turkish government recognises the current flag as the official Ottoman flag? How is the current flag better than the more recognisable one? Can you point to any sources for that image? If there was no official flag, then what is the most commonly used state flag? What is the most widely recognised Ottoman flag? --Yodakii 18:37, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: U are thinking with 20th century terminology. That does not mean more advance, just it means our time. There was no nation for ottomans, to come up a national flag. I do not know how much else I can help to u with this. All the falgs (not a single flag) defined the nation (their devleti aliye). I advise you to watch the Ottoman Mehter Takimi, that will give you a visual clue about their conept, if you can get it! :-). There is a link at the page to insignia law which is the highest referance I can give to you on the internet. Rest is on your shoulders. ps:The recognizable flag you are talking has the star cutting the outer peripher of the moon, that is REPUBLIC OF TURKEY's flag. Just to remind you, again for the importance of the visual clues... By the way this is a comman mistake, even among the most respectful western source. The logic goes like this I guess; If it is not your flag, they all look the same. --tommiks 18:50, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: So there is no one official flag? In that case, what makes the flag currently in the introduction any better? --Yodakii 03:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, mention any references you know of in References section. --Yodakii 05:06, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Kızıl Tuğ(The red flag) was the only thing that we can consider as a "flag" at the Ottoman Empire until the modern flag of the empire was designed in the last times of the empire. All old Turkish states used the Kızıl Tuğ(Mongol Empire and Golden Horde also used it even if they weren't Turkish states, Mongols are the Turan brothers of Turks). It was the most important figure(as well as grey wolf) in the Turkish history. With respect, Deliogul 22:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In reality there was no A flag.

message: Someone keeps trying to delete entries about the ancient Greek origin of the star and crescent. There is no reason for the romantic myth abotu the battle of kosovo to be contained within the first paragraph without mentioning the factual origin of the symbol. nationalism, especially when it comes to straight out lies cannot be accepted on wikipedia
The flag has a complex origin. The color red is a prominent color in Turkish history. The crescent and star, however comes from an an ancient Greek symbol of Byzantium (now Istanbul). Upon capturing the city in 1453 the Turks found many flags with stars and crescents and adopted this symbol as a good omen. while it is now used as an Islamic symbol, this is only because of the fact that the Turks adopted the ancient Greek symbol and then their infulence over the middle east meant that it came to be a symbol for Islam. There are also several myths regarding the adaptation is that the Turks had won a great victory with heavy losses in the Battle of Manzikert against the Byzantines in the year 1071, which led them to move into Anatolia. After the battle when the Sultan (The Khan at the time) walked through the battle field, there was a pool of blood formed between a group of Turkish soldiers, with the crescent moon and the star reflecting upon it. The Sultan adopted this reflection as the flag of Turks, however this view is one more of a romantic myth than any factual basis.
Well, the crescent as a symbol was also in use in the pre-Islamic Uygur-Turk kingdoms, e.g. usually artistic depictions portraying monarchs or religious dignitaries show a crescent whose both sharp ends point to the top.
(Will try to find an example from the scource in my college library, think it was the 'Uygurica'...)
In ancient and contemporary non-Islamic Turkic and Lamaist Mongolian art crescents are to be found, too. Since Manichaeism was the the first state-religion to be introduced by a Uyghur-Turk ruler after shamanism, this might be the explanation for the spread of this symbol in Mongolia, East-Tukistan, even when Buddhism and other religions gained more importance, and eventually in the Ottoman empire. Manichaeism somehow acted as a bridge to the cultural sphere of the various Iranic empires and manifold cultures in Middle Eastern and Anatolian antiquity that influenced its neighbours and successors, including Greek and Persian cultures respectively.
The crescent symbol, if I am not mistaken, goes back to the originally Phoenician goddess Ashtoreth and the Hellenic goddesses Selene and Phoebe... and that finally lead to this usage of the moon symbol in its crescent-shaped form throughout that region.
Nevertheless since animism was the aboriginal belief system of the ancient Turks, Turkic and other similar - related or unrelated - peoples throughout East Central Asia and Siberia, that even shows parallels to Japanese Shintoism, it has to be taken into account that Sun and Moon deities (well, Stars, too..) were deeply inherent to these aboriginal cultures.
So it could be mere chance that a crescent was used there as well. Even if you doubt that, the moon played an important role there too, and the crescent shape as symbol was already of relevance in the Manichaeist and Buddhist Uyghur kingdoms! So the Turks who appeared in Anatolia got it from them. Period. 134.100.1.121 09:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancient Greek origin of Star and crescent

message: Shouldn't this page be at Ottoman flag instead of Ottoman Flag? —Khoikhoi 00:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should. Done. —Nightstallion (?) 12:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: These dates 1299-1453 and 1453-1789 not true. The simulation in the article proves that the Ottoman Flag comes from Kosova war whicn happened in 1389. As you can see these date 1453 is false. I change that. Ruzgar 19:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added some comment over on the talk page for Flag of Turkey explaining why the 1389 theory is unlikely;  the Battle of Kosovo happened on 15 June (Julian calendar), which is the 23rd June (Proleptic Gregorian Calendar) and this astronomical coincidence did happen on the 28th July - but that is over a month after the battle and the death of Murad I. The confusion of 28ths would point to this theory originating after 1900, since 15th June (Julian) is now 28th June (Gregorian). Given the factual innacuracies, this definitely needs a citation. Bazzargh (talk) 15:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  1389 or 1453 

message: I wish people would stop replacing the Ottoman flag with the "correct" flag.  It is not the correct flag, it is the naval flag.  Look at it, and look at the naval flag.  The 7 pointed star is for the navy, the 5 pointed star is for the state.
--Ingoman 19:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The modern naval flag is not the same as the national flag 

message: Here is the assessment according to the Good Article criteria:
:1. It is well written
:Need improvements
:*The first paragraph starting with The early years are a time … is story-like prose which should be made more encyclopaedic. Another example of prose that needs improvement: this going all the way back to when.
:*Run-on sentence. His son Orhan I saw himself differently, he saw…
:*Sudden introduction of a subject without sufficient explanation: who bore the level of Roman legitimacy. Some additional explanations on “Roman legitimacy” is needed if this is related to the subject of the flag.
:*Example of weasel words: It could be because, might just have been
:2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
:Need improvements
:*No sources are cited. The “Legends” section definitely needs citations.
:*Example of bad prose that also needs a citation: Why red was the perfect colour to say this with, we shall never know.
:3. It is broad in its coverage.
:Weak pass – Coverage seems fine, but I am not sure why there are passages concerning the status of dhimmi (Jews and Christians). Is this related to the flag or the history of the Ottoman Empire?
:4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
:Pass
:5. It is stable
:Pass
:6. It contains images
:Pass
In summary, the article should go through a copyedit and a better encyclopaedic tone should be adopted and then the references should be inline cited within the article. After making these changes, please resubmit the article for GA nomination. RelHistBuff 12:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Upon reviewing, I am under the impression that the most critical point is the referencing, as good copyeditors aren't as hard to find. From what I see, most of the text comes from the books cited in the end. What should be done is to retrieve the pages where the statements are made and stuff the article with inline citations, using the "cite book" template. From there GA is quasi-guaranteed.--SidiLemine 13:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA status

message: I see pantone numbers being cited for the 1936 flag below. As I've commented on this page before, I cannot offer a third party opinion, but I am curious about that - Pantone didn't exist as a company until 1962, and even the 1983 law only says 'red' (in translations I've seen). Is there any evidence that it was as specific as that, e.g. using the Munsell color system, which was around at the time? Bazzargh (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Pantone coding may not have existed but color standardization did exist. Especially in the Ottoman Empire beginning in the 17th century. There was an article for it...Costumes of the Ottoman Empire I also did a search for you. You can access to :tr:s:2994 Sayılı Türk Bayrağı Kanunu#2.1 which points to :tr:s:Türk_Bayrağı_Tüzüğü#İKİNCİ BÖLÜM - Bayrağın Kumaşı, Standartları ve Direği in which it gives the dye properties in diffraction (for cotton and silk separate) in specific wavelengths (460 mn and 620 nm) that can be used in constrution of the flags. You can use the [color charts] to figure out the correct color from these diffraction/wavelength/material values. Today it will be Phantone, tomorrow it will be another standard. I do not see why this specific conversion could be a problem. Somebody did conversion sometime in the past I guess. --Kemalist (talk) 01:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Colours were somewhat consistent in the past due to the limited natural dyes available, in this case usually madder or carmine, but were never as specific as a single pantone number. Colours are also more than just single wavelengths (eg consider brown), and mixing complex dyes to get the perception of different colours (ie what pantone is for) isn't straightforward; screen colour charts are particularly misleading due to their limited gamut, and uncalibrated monitors. It seems more likely to me that the intention in just specifying "red" in the law was to use local "Turkey red" cloth - a colour resulting from a madder-based dye process used worldwide throughout the 19th century, common in Turkey, but largely replaced with synthetic dyes by 1900 (alizarin, napthol red, etc). Its interesting that "Turkey red" is bluish in comparison to synthetic alizarin or madder red (see eg , note screen colours/shades never match the real world, but two swatches from a common source allow comparison), and that the combination of wavelengths you mention mixes orange-red with blue. If you have pantone cards to look at, compare 206C (roughly Turkey red) with 186C, it's noticeably darker. Anyway, enough of this digression, I'm not helping the article by tying you up here. Bazzargh (talk) 13:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pantone

message: Why not simply rotate the star in :Image:Ottoman_Flag.svg so a single point is orientated toward the center of the crescent's opening? Vassyana (talk) 07:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Do not forget to refresh your cache. --Kemalist (talk) 13:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me, but the star could be better-crafted. The lines of the star do not correspond to each other. Res Gestæ Divi Augusti (talk) 01:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do not know if you really read the responses, but the "fat star" is fat as lines of the star did not use "golden ratio" (slim looking) so its building blocks are not "isosceles triangle" and so lines do not correspond. Golden_ratio#Golden_triangle.2C_pentagon_and_pentagram --Kemalist (talk) 05:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third opinion 

message: How many times this argument going to resurface. Ottoman Empire is not a national empire to have a "national" flag. The falg you are presenting as "national" is civilian flag. Read the Millet (Ottoman Empire). What does "ottoman national" means? Who is this ottoman nation? The members of Ottoman Dynasty? You really need to stop this behavior. --Kemalist (talk) 03:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "National flags" and "national anthems" are also used by multiethnic states, such as the United States of America, the Russian Federation, etc. Also, stop removing referenced material. You do not own this article, and you behave like a child. Res Gestæ Divi Augusti (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ottoman Empire is not an "national empire" to have an "Ottoman national flag" 

message: This flag is supposed to be derived, by the original creator's statement, from the Catalan Atlas. However, if one views the high-res version of the map, one can easily see that a) the red and yellow flag covering Bithynia (then the heart of the Ottoman state) is in fact inverted, with its staff pointing to the coast, b), that it is identical with the flag above Constantinople (then still the capital of the Byzantine Empire), and c), that the "tamghas" are more like the letter "B" than what is actually depicted in the "Ottoman" flag. In fact, the flag in the atlas is the same as the well-known and solidly documented flag of the Byzantine Empire during the Palaiologan period: , . It is more than probable that the flag over Bithynia is meant to denote some coastal city (likely Heraclea Pontica), which at the time was still (or though by the atlas' author to be) in Byzantine hands. Given that this design is very widely used in all versions of Wikipedia, and given WP's visibility, it is urgent that either some other, reliable source be provided for this flag, or that it be deleted. I have already contacted the original creator, User:Ingoman, for a comment. Constantine   ✍  19:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Those should be firesteels on the flag, which appear to look like a B.  That was the flag used by the last dynasty of Constantinople, and it was a very well-known flag and it would not have been uncommon to see that flag used to identify the city of Constantinople years after its fall.  You might note that the cross has been removed from the flag, likely this was done purposely to signify the city lost its Christian orientation.  [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 03:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, for one thing, the firesteels were a Western emblem, and nothing like the tamghas claimed here, which also quite clearly retains the cross. For the other, this flag is claimed to have been flown by the Ottomans on the 14th century, i.e. before the city's fall. It is evident that the flag's creator misinterpreted the Byzantine flag for an Ottoman one. Constantine   ✍  15:42, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ottoman flag 1326-1517 

message: His son Orhan I saw himself differently, he saw the state that he inherited from his father as a successor to the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, and even married a Byzantine princess. The flag that he flew combined the Byzantine flag of the Palaiologoi with that of the Kayihan khanate, replacing the B's with Kayi tamghas.
Has this a RELIABLE source? Why would he see himself a successor to the Byzantine Empire? The Byzantine Empire still existed in his time and was still a bit big and strong.
Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbian, Romanians etc hate Ottomans and say they did the worst things and were the most intolerant people, but still they claim everything of the Ottomans and find it an honour to have ties with them.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.21.37 (talk) 10:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The idiotic comments aside, the point raised is valid, especially since the main apparent argument to support it was the existence of this flag, which (see section above) never actually existed. I've therefore removed this section as OR. Constantine   ✍  14:45, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop Greek claims! 

message: i thougth the red-golden triangle flag was used by the ottoman empire in 1683, the year of their bigest expansion and the year of the famous battle of vienna. Doncan94 (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  correct flag in 1683? 

message: The present article says:
"Osman's grandson Murad I, who bore the level of Roman legitimacy his father could only dream of, ironically reversed his father's policy and forged a completely new identity for the domains, casting off any claim to Roman legitimacy or tribal affiliations and founding the Ottoman Empire. It is unknown why red was chosen for the new flag. It has no bearing to traditional tribal colours (which were white and gold) or popular Turkic colours (usually blue, white and gold)."
But wasn't red the color of Rome, and in consequence, Byzantium?--Menah the Great (talk) 20:01, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murad's flag 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flags of the Ottoman Empire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131020034634/http://www.royaltombs.dk/turcja/avsta.html to http://www.royaltombs.dk/turcja/avsta.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:15, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians!
Recently, Orwellianist uploaded a revised version the Flag of the Ottoman Empire (with a thinner crescent & star) and I've noticed it sparked a minor edit war.
I am the original author of the earlier Ottoman flag and I'd like to add my two cents. Until 2007, Ottoman Empire article was using the Flag of Turkey in the article. The community has decided that the Ottoman Empire page needed a different flag because the Turkish flag was not standardized until mid 1930s. As a design student and an active Wikipedian back then, I made several different versions that we could use in the article - maybe within half an hour. While they were vaguely based in some old photos, I honestly never gave it the attention it deserves. One of these flags were adopted by the community after a rather quick discussion (at least by Wikipedia standards.) Some time after that DsMurat made a small update and the flag has been stable ever since apart from a color update (See archives of the Talk:Ottoman Empire for original discussion).
If my personal opinion matters, I think Orwellianist's version of the flag better represents the flag used in the final years of the Ottoman Empire. Therefore, I support the change. I also think that Orwellianist's version is significantly different than the original flags I and DsMurat have uploaded, so Orwellianist needs to be credited appropriately (which I have taken the liberty to do so.) Finally, I happen to know a professor in Middle Eastern studies who knows quite a bit about Flags of the Ottoman Empire (It's one of his areas of expertise). I'm hoping to bring him into the discussion and get his opinion on the matter so maybe we can do some more minor edits.
I'm hoping this becomes the first step of the initiative to redesign the Flag of an Empire that ceased to exist ~100 years ago! (Actually, it's more of a process to obtain an accurate representation of it, but regardless.)
Best, Kerem Özcan (talk) 08:32, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent update of the File:Flag of the Ottoman Empire.svg 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://theculturetrip.com/europe/turkey/articles/9-cool-facts-about-turkeys-national-flag/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Sam Sailor 11:37, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed