Caucasian Prayer Rug

[Joy Richards]

Most ingeniously, I think you included the vital clue to the matter right in there with your images.

I believe the spouse, who may not necessarily have been Bulgarian, back in the dim mists of time (but after 1964), got the same take from his/her spouse. This realization, of course, created instant panic. He/she was too civilized to apply the thumb screw directly to the afflicted mate, so, he/she applied it to the nearby edition of Schürmann, Caucasian Rugs. The Royal Canadian Mounties, under Sergeant Preston and his Great Dog, King, arrived in time to save the book, but it was nearly too late. At least, that's how it looks to me! :monalisa:


You're absolutely right, and very close to this Bulgarian spouse's cockamamie theory.

:applause:

[Joel Greifinger]

So, I guess that you have ruled out Quchan Kurd for this piece ?Hi Chuck,

Other than the use of the adapted Turkmen motif and SY knotting, there don't seem to be other indicators of the rug being Kordi. Probably most dissuasive, I've never seen a single-wefted Kordi rug. And, other than the wool foundation, Joy's 'attic rescue' rug has field and border patterns and a weave pattern consistent with Taleghan rugs that I have seen. Q.E.D. :laughing_2:

Joel


Here's a Kordi version:


https://s22.postimg.cc/4bitcqrkx/Kordi_Tukmen_gul.jpg

[Joy Richards]

I was going to start another thread for my other 'finds', but then while reading through Danielle's on bag covers, I found an embedded article by Dinie Gootjes in her comment about rug societies in Toronto which you have probably all read.

http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00131/salon.html

It's entitled Pictures at an Exhibition: Parsons and Paiwand and it includes colour plates of Taghan carpets. The very last one shown is described as "an old Taghan carpet made in Labijar which displays a marked Saltuq influence".

I mention this because the first carpet I was going to show has always in my mind been a Tekke, but looking at the Taghan carpet shown in the article, I realized it too could be a Taghan. You'll see that it's in very bad shape. In one piece, but very fragile - especially on the ends. It's been hanging on the wall for ten years and I'm loath to even vacuum it in case it falls apart.

It measures 82" x 84" and it's threadbare. It, together with a Baluch (for another thread), was folded and left on the sidewalk outside the high end Harry Rosen men's clothing store. Harry Rosen and his brother set up a made to measure hole in the wall on what is now a dodgy street on the east side of Toronto in 1954, and by 1961 had done well enough to move closer to their clients in the financial area. That store was there till around 2008 when the rugs were thrown onto the sidewalk for pick-up. A friend of mine who understood my insanity (he collected old glass) found them, dragged them home and gave them to me.

When I went to take pictures, I realized it looks just like the last old Taghan so since, by some extraordinary coincidence, I may have two old Taghans, I felt it was right to keep it on here.

I know it's hard to see it, but this is the best I could do, and Steve helped to make it look more like itself. Thanks to my bad photographing skills, it's also lying vertically instead of horizontally. Fringes should be to the left and right, not above and below:

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/RosenFull.jpg

Following are close-ups which look SO much like the Taghan in the article:

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell//RosenDetail.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell//RosenDetail3.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell//RosenDetail4.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell//RosenDetail.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell//RosenFringe.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell//RosenFringe2.jpg

And the back, which doesn't look that much different from the front! Actually, now that I see the picture, it looks much better, but not surprising.

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell//RosenBack1.jpg

There are two blues, one darker one lighter, but not sure if that can be seen.

If the carpet was new in 1954, it had over 50 years of very heavy traffic but of course, it may not have been new. Is it a Taghan? Was it worth saving? Can I take the risk and vacuum it?

[Steve Price]

Hi Joy

The photo of the full rug that you sent was in landscape orientation (fringes at the sides). One of Rugdom's customs is to present rugs in the orientation that they had while on the loom - warps (hence, fringes) vertical. So I rotated the image 90 degrees. I can put it back the way it was if you prefer it that way - it's your rug, after all.

Steve

[Joy Richards]

That makes sense, of course, Steve. Please leave as is. Thank you.

Joy

[Rich Larkin]

Hi Joy,

Perhaps you are aware that your rug is Ersari from the Turkoman (Turkmen) sector of rugs. The names (variants of one designation) refer to the several tribal groups (Tekke, Saryk, Salor, Yomud, Ersari, et al) from central Asia who occupied (inter alia) Turkmenistan and substantial parts of Afghanistan and northeastern Iran. In general, each group is said to have employed a distinctive gul in its larger rugs ("main carpets") and storage bags (not necessarily the same gul in the mains vs. the bags).

There is a good deal of literature on the subject which I will not get into here. My chief point is to note the general topic and indicate that your rug was very probably woven in Northwestern Afghanistan by Ersaris. The earlier rugs are usually described by aficionados with reference to the principal Turkoman group (e. g., Ersari). More recent weavings by Ersaris settled in Afghanistan in particular tend to be described with reference to the locale where they were woven, such as Daulatabad, Labijar, Taghan, etc. To a substantial extent, rugs like yours (and mine) with the characteristic large guls were often simply called "Afghan" in the rug trade in the middle of the 20th century and before. More recently, the use of the subdivisions (i. e., towns, villages or tribal names) has become common.

I am pretty sure your rug is quite a bit older than 1954. I acquired this one from a gentleman whom I knew well and who knew the history of its acquisition in his family very well (they were in the rug business), and he thought it was from the mid to late 1890s. BTW, this particular gul (both yours and mine) is often called the "Gulli Gul" by aficionados and commentators.

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/Afghan_big.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/Afghan_close.jpg

Other points of identity between our two rugs that make them 'family' are the brownish quality of the madder-dyed wool, use of a lot of hair in the warps, the dark brown wefts, the minor gul of schematically linked eight-pointed stars, and the brown hair wrapping of the selvages (are there any such surviving on your piece?). These are all qualities that link the two rugs as close relatives.

I certainly would not hesitate to clean it up, including vacuuming and in fact washing. The latter must be done with care and an understanding of the necessities. As to vacuuming, as long as you are careful not to let the hose suck in the loose ends and such, you should be OK. It is worth doing and the item is worth keeping IMHO. (The price was right!) BTW, your acquisition methods are outstanding!:cheers:

Rich

[Joel Greifinger]

When I went to take pictures, I realized it looks just like the last old Taghan so since, by some extraordinary coincidence, I may have two old Taghans, I felt it was right to keep it on here. Hi Joy,

When I read this, I wasn't sure whether "the last old Taghan" you were referring to was the Taleghan you posted earlier that has the large Turkmen-derived motifs. Despite the origins of those motifs among Turkmen tribes, that rug was woven quite a distance away (about 2000km) from this Ersari rug that was probably woven in Afghanistan. The other (Taleghan) is from the Elburz Mountains region in northern Iran, northwest of Teheran and is part of a different weaving tradition.

You mentioned Dinie Gootjes's Turkotek salon. One of the discussion threads from that salon shows a great variety of Ersari main carpet güls and may be of interest: http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00131/s131_t2.htm

Joel

[Joy Richards]

I can hear the collective groan, but I can also see how and why I made the mistake now that it's been pointed out! However, I will not attempt any further identification and create confusion. Joel, you're very patient with me ...

Your Ersari, Rich, looks like a beauty and I wonder how thick the pile is? My old thing is a much humbler rendition of yours - only one border, no selvedge - but thank you for showing how it must once have looked and how it is worth keeping.

It must be said that I have learned more from this than from the pile of books on my table. But I hope to receive the Peter Stone this week, sans injury, and will send another couple of pictures in a few days.

[Joel Greifinger]

I can hear the collective groan, but I can also see how and why I made the mistake now that it's been pointed out! However, I will not attempt any further identification and create confusion.Hi Joy,

You'll hear no groan from me. The last thing I'd want to do is to dampen your curiosity and desire to make these connections. So, please feel encouraged to continue to try out identifications. They provide opportunities for the folks here to learn from each other.

Joel

[Rich Larkin]

Hi Joy,

You'll hear no groan from me. The last thing I'd want to do is to dampen your curiosity and desire to make these connections. So, please feel encouraged to continue to try out identifications. They provide opportunities for the folks here to learn from each other.

Joel

Right! Any people on this site who seem to know something acquired the information after long periods of looking at rugs, books, etc. It can be a very elusive subject. No one should be groaning about someone else going through the process.

[Joy Richards]

This little thing may be a piece of cake as far as identification is concerned, and I'm not going to risk saying anything, but I would like to know from whence it hails. Until the Stone arrives, I will be revisiting the archives here. See if I can understand anything....

It's 4'4 x 3'1 and in excellent shape. It wasn't exactly a rescue, but more of a find. On a lawn, folded in four and I could have it for $10. It had been in the basement (folded) for probably 20 or 30 years. Could have been more, in a house that contained some gorgeous Persian and Turkish carpets. The owners both lived past their hundredth birthdays and were charming world travellers, with distinguished careers behind them. Why this one was relegated to the basement I don't know, but it doesn't look as if it's ever been walked on. The lady who dragged it up was their housekeeper of 40 years, and she was glad I liked it.

I have it on a wall in a rather dark place, so it was difficult to get the full impact of the rich colour, but I know that when you see it, you'll know how the colour should look.

And I know, I know. I shouldn't be hanging any rug with nails like this. Bulgarian's fault.

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/DunveganFull.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/DunveganDetail.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/DunveganBorder.jpg

The back:

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/DunveganBack.jpg

Joy

[Marvin Amstey]

The palette is Baluchi; the design is taken from Turkmen engsi's; the weave is probably Afghan, although it could be Eastern Iran. I would guess that this was made in Afghanistan within the last 50 years. If it's great wool, and you love it, illuminate it!
Enjoy
Marvin

[Rich Larkin]

Hi Joy,

This one is a bit of a puzzler. It appears to echo a certain type of Turkoman (Turkmen) rug called "ensi," but is not one of the recognized types.

If you followed Joel's link to Dinie's salon that showed a variety of Ersari guls, you ought to be getting a sense of the greater Turkoman family of rugs. Those weaving tribes and groups produced repertoires of bags and rugs that served specific functional purposes, and the ensi was one of them. (It has been widely reported that the function of the ensi was as a sort of curtain hanging in the entrance of the yurt, though that proposition is not accepted universally by scholars.) I googled "Turkoman Turkmen ensi" and was offered the choice, "images...," where many ensis (inter alia) were illustrated.

If you peruse a selection like that, you should see the connection to your rug. However, it would be a stretch to call your rug an ensi within the generally understood meaning of the term. Rather, it reflects the ensi tradition in various respects, including general layout, the two 'ram's horn' devices at the tops of the two vertical column structures in the center of the rug, and the character of the repetitive secondary ornament (hooks, 's' forms, etc.). It is smaller than most ensis by about a foot or so in each direction. The palette is at the outside margin of what one expects in Turkoman work. Though some of that implements dark plum to brown in place of the usual red, your rug's palette does not really evoke the Turkoman idea. In that regard, the orange looks like a fairly harsh synthetic dye. (Is that color substantially sharper on the back as compared with the front?) If I were to select a Turkoman group that featured a palette close to that of your rug, it would be Chaudor (some rugs), or possibly Arabatchi. But I am reaching in that respect.

The questions arise, who wove it, and where. I cannot say I recall having seen other rugs that strike me as belonging with your rug in terms of provenance, and I can only speculate about its origins. I would guess somewhere in Turkmenistan or southerly of that region in northern Afghanistan, in a rustic setting. The general materials (all wool), finish (e. g., knotted-off warp ends), and overall look are consistent with those areas and that context.

The rug has nearly fully depressed warp construction, if you are familiar with that notion, and it is rather finely woven for that type of work at about 180 knots per square inch. You mentioned that it spent many years folded. Is it supple or stiff? The weave structure might suggest some stiffness.

Rich

P. S.: I just noticed Marvin's post. I agree that the palette suggests some Baluchi work from about the period he suggests, though the weave and degree of fineness do not seem to me to be consistent with that attribution. But it is a possibility, and the fleeting evocation of the ensi would be typical of the Baluch.

[Joy Richards]

Thank you both for your replies.

Rich, in answer to your questions. Yes, the colour on the back is brighter than on the front, and the picture of the back that I posted makes the orange look more red than it is. There is no red in the rug at all. On the colour scale, it's 'orange red' The front is very evenly faded across the whole rug. The feel is not supple but stiff.

I had also done a search for the Turkmen family and found Dinie's Salon on Ersari and could see the design similarities, but couldn't understand the small size of this rug. To me, the back looks very finely woven, finer than on what I think is an old Baluch that I haven't shown yet. And finer than the weave on our Afghan war rug.

I am beginning to see how this sleuthing is what holds people captive and doesn't really exist in any other art. Modern technology has taken a lot of the mystery out of whether a painting is a fake or not, and is less reliant on our eyes.

I like this little rug, wherever it's from, because it has an elegance about it, but Marvin, if I illuminate it more, that fading will increase and keep reminding me that it's made of synthetic dyes, therefore an impostor. At least to me it will. That sounds harsh, because it's not even clear what or who it's pretending to be, but when I compare the back and front of the aforementioned old Baluch (the one I found with the Rosen main carpet but haven't shown) and see exactly the same colour, despite the very heavy wear and exposure to harsh light for decades, it takes some of the delight away. That's probably because I'm new at this and less tolerant ... whoever wove it may not have had access to anything other than chemical dyes, but still. I think it will remain in the darkened hallway but not as mysterious as it was yesterday.

Joy

[Rich Larkin]

Hi Marvin,

I have a late Baluch balisht with an obviously late (in a bad way) palette of the wrong kind of purple and dingy gray-brown. It also has significant quantities of neutral dark brown as a background color and 'dirty gold' as an accent and outline color. I wouldn't have thought it comparable to Joy's pseudo ensi, as the palette is essentially different, and the design very different. But checking the weave, I am surprised to note it is similar to her piece. It is not as fine, but it has the same nearly fully depressed warp structure, and in a general way, though they look quite different, I can imagine them as part of the same late Baluch weaving milieu. Some of the random secondary ornament would be very comfortable with many of the elements of Joy's design. So, I give the Baluch attribution more of a chance.

Rich

P. S.: Joy, I see your recent post. Don't place too much weight on the fact that one Baluch doesn't seem much like another. Though rugs from the same 'matrix,' if I could use that term, often have a family resemblance among themselves, it is also true that there are distinct groups that bear little resemblance, one to the other. This is often due to the historical and/or geographical separation of the groups over a period of time. The 'Baluch' rubric is like that, and others are as well: Kurd, Afshar, etc. (That's why we are all a bit crazy!)

[Chuck Wagner]

Hi Joy, et al.,

Building on Rich's comments about more recent Baluch rug palettes, here is an example that I think is probably from the 1940s-1950's, dating largely due to materials and the two sword-wielding lions that are associated with the later Persian dynasties and have been largely absent from weavings since the revolution and overthrow of the shah.

It is knotted asymmetric open left, 9H x 9V, double-wefted with two shots of dark brown weft, warps of ivory wool, tightly plied goat hair selvage, and a warm, dark palette. There is a classic scary synthetic orange used (triangle elements of human figures, some horse feet, end brocade), but it is moderated by the brown tones in the field. The main border is - I think - rather novel, with people, camels and dragons (unless someone wants them to be chickens) as the major motif.

Regards
Chuck

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/bf01.jpg


http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/bf02.jpg


http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/bf03.jpg


http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/bf04.jpg


http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/bf05.jpg


http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/bf06.jpg

[Joy Richards]

Hi Chuck,

Reading your post and understanding everything you say (except for the 'open left' but I'll get to it), I realize how much I've learned! Thank you. You're right about the scary orange, but the rest of it is charming and amusing, as are so many Baluch. And the border is very unusual.

Joy

[Rich Larkin]

Hi Chuck,

"...and dragons (unless someone wants them to be chickens)...."

Of course they are dragons, and flying ones too, which is all the more remarkable when you consider Game of Thrones could hardly have been much farther along than the first draft when the thing was woven! :wizard:

Rich

[Chuck Wagner]

Rich,

I don't think it's that new. Maybe as late as the early 60's but not more than that. It has some clear signs of wear on the selvage and is missing the awful purples and greens that we typically see in the rugs that started coming to the market around that time. And I haven't seen good quality ivory wool warps on new stuff, although that may just be a function of the limited set that I have observed.

But as we all know, anything is possible.

Regards
Chuck

[Rich Larkin]

Hi Chuck.
I don't think it's that new.
I was being facetious, always risky when referring to rugs.

Regarding the 'new crop' of (often unattractive) Baluch rugs, the ones I am referring to feature, besides some revolting colors, a generally dingy look to all of the colors. I attribute it to darkish grainy wool, though I am only guessing about that. The one I have hasn't got a bit of white in it.

They also feature designs I do not associate with older Baluch work.

Rich