So, this refers to a text, but isn't quite right. I guess that makes it all the more difficult, eh? Bonus for anyone who knows not only the play but what's wrong with this picture (exclusive of the art, because, well, just because).
For a change, this reminds me of something I know, albeit kind of garbled. This looks to me like a role-reversed depiction of Alp Arslan forcing Diogenes to submit to him publicly, after the battle of Manzikert. So first of all, the implication that the Ottoman is the submissive one here is wrong. Secondly, Alp Arslan was part of the Seljuq dynasty, not the Ottoman dynasty, so the whole Ottoman thing is just a convenient English-language pun.
So is this what you were thinking of, or did I see something totally different from your intention (as usual)? :)
I was thinking of Tamburlaine, myself. Alas, Dr. K, I'm clueless about your reference, but if it fits...
And I was thinking that Bajazet was the Persian king, but he's not, so I was wrong about there being something wrong, if that makes sense. He was the Ottoman emperor in the play.
For a change, this reminds me of something I know, albeit kind of garbled. This looks to me like a role-reversed depiction of Alp Arslan forcing Diogenes to submit to him publicly, after the battle of Manzikert. So first of all, the implication that the Ottoman is the submissive one here is wrong. Secondly, Alp Arslan was part of the Seljuq dynasty, not the Ottoman dynasty, so the whole Ottoman thing is just a convenient English-language pun.
ReplyDeleteSo is this what you were thinking of, or did I see something totally different from your intention (as usual)? :)
It's Tamburlaine and Bajazet in Marlowe's play.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what's wrong with it, though.
I was thinking of Tamburlaine, myself. Alas, Dr. K, I'm clueless about your reference, but if it fits...
ReplyDeleteAnd I was thinking that Bajazet was the Persian king, but he's not, so I was wrong about there being something wrong, if that makes sense. He was the Ottoman emperor in the play.