Splendid rugs

Thank you, Horst, for the interesting reportage.

Splendid rugs…

A few thoughts:

- Oriental rugs were used in Italian churches too, if not with the same “density”.
It was for their beauty and preciousness that they weren’t considered too extraneous to the church life, in spite of coming from a “theologically” different culture?

- I’m always surprised by the striking colors of ancient carpets. True, old churches tend to be quite obscure places and would have been an ideal place for the conservation of colored pigments in paintings or rugs.
Which makes me wonder, having worked in the cleaning and restoration of icons and iconostasis, if Protestant churches made lesser use of candles than their Orthodox (or Catholic, for that matter) counterparts. Probably, yes, because the smoke from the candles, with time and dust, creates a black-brown patina that covers everything.
Or perhaps they washed those rugs periodically… Did they?

- Another thing coming to mind in relation to churches is that they tend to keep records and their archives are often precious sources of information. I guess that they registered the donations as well given good data about the “minimal” age of each rug (meaning, not less than the date of acquisition ).

Did the book or the speeches touched any of the above points?

Regards,

Filiberto

Hello Filiberto,

I’ll try to go through your questions to the best of my recollection and, where this is getting thin, will lean on the good catalogue or patch up with own knowledge until someone comes along who is more specialized than me.

When the Romany withdrew in 271, they were followed by the Goths, Huns, Gepids, Avars, Slavs and other nomadic tribes. The middle-ages witnessed repeating incursions by the Tatars (Mongols). Nominally, at this time Transylvania belonged to the Magyars (Hungarians). Their population was too little to meet both the challenges of the time: economic development and military defence. Presumably therefore King Géza II ‘issued a call for immigrants to the Holy Roman Empire in the middle of the 12th century, wooing interested Parties with landholdings and generous privileges. Especially in the region around the Rhine and Moselle, but also in other localities, many farmers, craftsmen, traders and low-ranking aristocrats heeded the king’s call. These predominantly German speaking settlers, originally welcomed as “guests” (hospites), were soon subsumed under a generic term customarily used for immigrants from the west, Saxones, a name they ultimately made their own’ (quoted from the catalogue).

Once the Hungarians were defeated by the Ottoman Turkish army (battle of Mohács, 1526) Transylvania ‘became an autonomous principality under Turkish sovereignty, tributary to the sultan.’ This marked the beginning of an era in the region, which appears as unique in its blend of political, economical and religious conditions. Without much strife and religious persecutions, the reformation quickly gained hold and drew refugees from other countries less fortunate in this respect.

Transylvania’s role as a save haven would probably have been short-lived if it had not been for the mighty protection it received from the Ottoman empire against the surge of the counter-reformation. Interestingly, the liberal attitude the Ottomans showed towards their subjects in matters of their religious orientation, also seemed reflected in a religious and social tolerance, for which Transylvania was soon to be known in Europe.

Transylvania’s geo-political location in the east-west trade was brought to full advantage by a 250 years stretch of ‘Ottoman Peace’ in the region: trade and crafts flourished, and with it the guilds and the middle-classes.

While in the west of Europe, Turkish carpets remained a status symbol of the high aristocracy, the wealthy clergy and a very thin layer of elite merchants, to Transylvania, at the same time, and there also to the middle-classes, they had become a means of expressing one’s own, unique cultural course in history.

Against this background, the function of rugs in Transylvanian churches appears to be distinctly different in some aspects to that in Roman Catholic churches. Stefano Ionescu makes another interesting suggestion. He speaks of the ‘horror vacui’ that may have gripped the Lutherans once they had stripped the churches’ insides of most figurative images: ‘The warm and colourful Turkish rugs … found their place in the Reformed churches, which were to become their main custodians. This fact again confirms not only the traditional religious tolerance of Transylvanians but also the capacity of Oriental rugs to bridge different cultures.`
Speaking of this, it seems to me, that when comparing the atmosphere in churches and mosques, Lutheran churches and mosques seem more on a same scale in some aspects than they appear to be with regard to Roman Catholic or Orthodox churches.


This takes us to the number of candles and incense dispensers (or the lack of them) inside the churches, which in the case of the Lutheran churches will almost certainly be given credit by our-days textile conservators. As to the frequency of washing those rugs, nothing ‘official’ had been said at the conference. I would assume that those that went to the big 1914 Budapest exhibition, took a bath before they did. Stefano Ionescu told me on the side, that he had made a considerable effort to wash all those rugs a few years ago – how much soap and water he needed on the job, he did not say, nor did I ask. It is an interesting question you are asking, Filiberto, let’s hope, someone with expert knowledge chips in on it.

Yes, records were mentioned, church records, tax and custom’s office records, records on basis of inscriptions with names and purpose of the donation (wedding, baptism etc.). From this, one knows that the custom had begun in the late second half of the 15th century. Some donor inscriptions bear witness that the rugs had been kept in the same church for over 350 years. The earliest known inscription on a Transylvanian rug dates from 1646 on a ‘bird’ rug from Sighishoara (catalogue, p. 36).

Regards,

Horst Nitz

Hi Horst,

quote:

---

He speaks of the ‘horror vacui’ that may have gripped the Lutherans once they had stripped the churches’ insides of most figurative images...
Speaking of this, it seems to me, that when comparing the atmosphere in churches and mosques, Lutheran churches and mosques seem more on a same scale in some aspects than they appear to be with regard to Roman Catholic or Orthodox churches.

---

Hello Filiberto let me add a few points at your thoughts:

- Regarding Orthodox or Catholic Churches: the wealthy members of the Romanian population in Transylvania, mostly Greek Orthodox (and to a lesser extent, since the 18th century, also Greek Catholic), probably had rugs in their homes, but these were lost through wear and tear or eventually sold in the 19th century. Even if some rugs might have been part of the church furnishing, they would have been placed on the floor since the walls of the churches were decorated with icons and frescoes, and there were no pews, and so would have had little chance of surviving.

I think this is about what happened in Italy.

- Regarding the cleaning of the rugs I quote from AORT page 180:

"KŸhlbrandt also reports that in 1911 the rugs were displayed on the pews, in the choir and on the parapets of the galleries, having first been cleaned and partially reconditioned by local textile manufacturers W. Scherg & Co., a company that was owned by the family of Emil Schmutzler.
KŸhlbrandt, together with K‡roly Cs‡nyi and Domokos Teleki, selected 38 rugs from the collection of the Black Church for the great 1914 exhibition,7 where they were admired for Òthe brilliance and the freshness of their coloursÓ.

During the preparation of the book we had to wash about 200 rugs in the different parishes. In some cases we were in front of a severe dager because of the moths. Since 1990 or so nobody cared about the rugs and the restoration laboratory in Brasov run by Era NusbŠcher had been closed (and all the textile patches thrown away...) If you visit

http://www.transylvanianrugs.com/
work in progress section

you find some pictures of the cleaning campaign headed by Rodica Dinulescu of the Brukenthal Museum. We only used natural products (saponaria).

- Regarding the records please keep in mind that we can never identify a rug with those mentioned in the documents. The descriptions are too vague. So the only "direct" proof are the inscriptions. And Horst is right in quoting the oldest one from Sighisoara.

I am delighted to read your questions, which may lead to some unexplored issues.

Best

Stefano Ionescu

Dear Filierto and dear Horst,

I am delighted about this forum and I am sure it may lead to some unexplored issues.

Here are some points connected to Filiberto's thoughts.

- Rugs survived mainly in the Lutheran Churches where they became decent decorations after the Refomtion of the Church.
Rugs were used in churches to decorate the walls and galleries and occasionally to cover tombstones. Most of the rugs that survive today are in remarkable condition, showing little sign of being used underfoot. Many are still in good pile with intact fringes or kilim ends, something that is rarely seen in rugs over 300 years old.

- The Hungarian Reformed parishes in Transylvania owned a modest number of rugs, one or maybe a few in each church, mostly used to cover Ôthe table of the LordÕ . In order to face economic hardship or to raise the funds needed to repair the churches, the Hungarian Parishes had to sell almost all their rugs. This happened mainly in two waves first in the years of the great Budapest exhibition of 1914 and later during the years of economic crisis from 1934-1936.

- The wealthy members of the Romanian population in Transylvania, mostly Greek Orthodox (and to a lesser extent, since the 18th century, also Greek Catholic), probably had rugs in their homes, but these were lost through wear and tear or eventually sold in the 19th century. Even if some rugs might have been? part of the church furnishing, they would have been placed on the floor since the walls of the churches were decorated with icons and frescoes, and there were no pews, and so would have had little chance of surviving.

Neighbouring areas south and north of the Danube were also involved in trading activities and had links with the Ottoman Empire. Here too rugs were highly prised. Nevertheless nothing comparable to the Transylvanian phenomenon took place in any of those societies.

These lines may help you understan why the "Transylvanian" miracle is something very special.

Best,

Stefano Ionescu

__________________
Stefano

Hi Stefano

First, welcome to Turkotek.

I've taken the liberty of changing your user name to Stefano Ionescu. We think the use of full names helps to maintain a level of cordiality and civility that disappears from web forums much too often. The only effect it should have on you is that you will have to enter your full name when you log in.

Regards

Steve Price

Welcome aboard, Mr. Ionescu,

Thank you for your comments. I read also the three articles published by Hali that I found on the very interesting transilvanyanrugs.com site.

In short, the” Transylvanian rugs” phenomenon has to be attributed to opportunity, for the fact that they weren’t used on the floor but hung on walls or pews, choirs etc.
and to “ideology”: in the austere and aniconic spirit of the early Reformation, they were considered decent, and indeed suitable, decoration for recently denuded (former Catholic) churches. And when used by parishioners to mark out their personal space in the church, they also subtly hinted at the wealth and prestige of their owners. (Hali 137)

How ironic that most of these rugs are in the “niche” format, the one supposed to be for prayer rugs. They went much closer to their presumed task than all the prayer rugs in western collections…

There still is a fact that I found rather odd: If I understand well all of these rugs were Anatolian (all but one, a Cairene rug).

Ferenc Batar's article on Hali 136 (found on your website) "The First Turkish Carpet Exhibition in the West” mentions imports at the time in Hungary of Turkish and Persian rugs and "A 1629 inventory of one of Gabriel Bethlen’s palaces lists 155 European tapestries, 154 Persian and 105 Turkish carpets among the furnishings."
If in Hungary there was a presumably equal presence of Turkish and Persian rugs, why in Transylvanian churches only the Turkish variety was used? Was it a matter of format (intended also as size, not only composition) perhaps?
Best regards,

Filiberto

Dear Filiberto,

I am glad you found useful the material on my web site. I hope to add some more content soon.

Now let me answer a few questions which you arouse but keep in mind that I prefer information to speculations and about Transylvania there have been loads of misleading information. This is the main reason I started this project.

Candles in the Lutheran Churches versus Orthodox Churches
This is a good point. In the Lutheran Churches candles are only used in the altar during the service. In the Orthodox Churches at any time of the day (Normally who prays or just enters the church will lit up a candle).

Turkish or Persian first keep in mind that the Turkish rugs were a lot cheaper. Persian rugs were also mentioned but they were owned mainly by rich people like G‡briel Bethlen whom you mention. Unfortunately no rug from his collection (or from any other private collection assembled before 1800) is known to have survived to the present.

Second: In the new version of my book I added a new section about Ottoman Rugs from Transylvania in Western Collection (which was my speech at Volkmann Treffen meeting) showing that more or less all the Classical Turkish rugs from Hungary, Austria, Germany, Swiss, England most probably came from Transylvania which served, between 1850 and 1970, as a main source for Turkish rugs. If any Persian rug was there I am affraid it would have been the "first choice" of the numerous runners and dealers (Tuduc was one of them and try to figure what he sold abroad in about 50 years of "career"...)

Regarding the prayer format (which means all the Transylvanian group) I can only say that the saturated colours and the colourful borders made them more pleasing as decorative choices than the ÔLottoÕ or white-ground Selendi schemes of the period. I have no evidence about any special role of the prayer rugs in the Lutheran Churches but I know people like Boralevi or even Horst may have different opinions, which have no documentary ground.

Hope you will find acceptable some of these answers.

Best regards,

Stefano Ionescu

__________________
Stefano

Hi Stefano,

Yes, I mean the combination of niche design and small size made them perfect for hanging them on the front of pews while others rugs with different composition and/or bigger size were hung on the walls.
It seems that most of the carpets are in the range of 110/120cm. X 150/160cm. no?

quote:

---

Turkish or Persian first keep in mind that the Turkish rugs were a lot cheaper

---

Gentlemen,

This is a most interesting salon, and we greatly appreciate the opportunity to experience the exhibition this way. I find it extraordinary that so many of these particular rugs survived in such good condition. It must mean that a very seriously considered policy of care and conservation attended these rugs from the beginning and persisted intact through the many years.

Filiberto, your question about the relative abundance of Anatolian rugs and the absence of other (e. g., Persian) rugs is intriguing. Stefano's comments are illuminating, yet I have to think there must have been other factors at play as well, lost to us today.

__________________
Rich Larkin