David R E Hunt

Hi Trevor

Am quite the fan of these wall hangings myself. At one point in time had a mid 20th century Kapunuk of Ersari (I think) origin, but decided to trade it in for a model of greater vintage. Even among those of recent vintage, it is my experience that not all of these weavings are created equal, from an esthetic standpoint, and I found mine more attractive than many. Unfortunately, have yet to get a replacement vintage model.

But I do have in my collection two Indian pieces, a Toran or door hanging (coincidently the "Textile of the Month" at The Textile Museum here in Washington DC), and a door surround, of the same configuration as a kapunuk.

The similarities between these weavings, the Kalyk and the Toran as well as the Kapunuk and this door surround, in both appearence and use/function, suggests to me that there may be a cultural connection between these two groups, besides the ornamental.

First, the Toran, which I suspect proceeds from the Gujarat region of India.







These hanging flaps, which remind of lappets, are said to represent Mango leaves. It is my understanding that these Toran are suspended above doorways as ornament, and can constitute a dowry weaving in traditional marriages, although not limited to this matrimonial function. There can be many in a household and can be changed regularly, or for social functions, holidays, etc.. The predominating theme, besides the bright colors, mirrors and geometric borders, are those of animal and floral design elements.

Next, the door surround. I don't know the indigenous term for this door surround, unlike the Turkmen "Kapunuk".













Notice that in the last image, a pointed termination is suggested by the embroidered design.

It's just a thought, but is it possible that these two types of ornamental weavings might share a common origin? I have seen Suzani modified to form a door surround, and we have here both an embroidered and a pile woven door surround. If you turn to page 200 in "Turkmen Studies I", you will find (and hope to get a scan up shortly) a photograph of a Kalyk in which a series of lappets, Mango leaves, or panels (chose your prefered term) project downward and across the entire breadth of the weaving, strikingly similar to the Toran.

Given that the combination of floral and animal elements are a theme to be found in Mughol arts, that both the Toran and Khalyk are associated with the dowry, and that the the door surround is found in the decorative repetoir of Indian, Turkmen, and Bukharran cultures alike, could it follow that these cultural artifacts are vestiges of their common history?

Just An Idea...

Dave

David R E Hunt

Hi

The above mentioned image, plate 417 on page 200, of the Toran-like Khalyk from T.S.I.




It's worth noting that the authors, Pinner and Franses, assert that those Khalyk with downward projecting appendages of equal length, both that depicted above and of the more routine variety, are all of Yomud origin.


I happened to come upon another manifestation of a Toran, as depicted below, and accompanied by the following text:





"Toran is the name in Hinduism (Sanskrit. torana, from tor, pass) of a sacred or honorific gateway in Buddhist architecture. Its typical form is a projecting cross-piece resting on two uprights or posts. It is made of wood or stone , and the cross-piece is generally of three bars placed one on the top of the other; both cross-piece and posts are usually sculptured.

Toran may also refer to a decorative door hanging, usually decorated with marigolds and mango leaves, or a string that is tied on the door with the flower on it as a part of traditional Hindu culture on the occasion of pooja",


both image and text courtesy of Wikipedia.


Note the similarity between the above incarnation of the Toran, with that of the Turkmen Asmylak seen below;





If memory serves (which it doesn't always), Buddism has exerted much influence upon the culture of Central Asia, and as such, the similarities demonstrated by these various Turkmen, Hindu, and Buddist trappings could represent an artifact of this past influence?


Dave

Trevor White

Dave, it seems that coincidences abound. I have often looked at some of our textiles and have seen some remarkable similarities in them – colouring, shape and form, motifs, etc. – as you have between torans and khalyks and/or asmylaks. I rarely go beyond noting any similarities, though. It seems stretching a point to suggest, for example, that our Central American textiles are linked to the weaver of our Bhutanese hanging, or that some Ecuadorean woven bands and ribbons are connected with the Sami from Lapland.

I remember over 40 years ago – when today’s New Age thinking was gestating – going into all the fanciful theories about the origin of Stonehenge, the location of Atlantis, and the forces behind Ley Lines in Britain. These fancies were rife with way-out presumptions about some similarities. These were developed into way-in assumptions and imagined connections. Stir in a little circularity of argumentation (available from any ouiji board), and we arrive at (…er! …) hard facts. (A process not uncommon in the natural sciences, either!)

However, I often came back to cautions once expressed by an archeologist (his name long forgotten.) He pictured primitive men, maybe continents apart. They wanted to make the first earthen drinking vessels from clay. He challenged his readers to imitate both those early ancestors and to come up with anything different than some sort of beaker shape. When it came to surface-decoration, there were few possibilities beyond striped, square, diamond, zigzag combinations of straight-line scratching. So, creating an imaginary scenario, finding traces of similar-looking beakers on Salisbury Plain and also in the Near East did not mean that Stonehenge was built by Proto-Bedouins!! All that those guys wanted was a drink!!

Maybe I am a bit insensitive, needing a little more help and info about the toran and asmylak you show. I can see little similarity other than a pentagonal shape. There is, however, great similarity with our toran (below) that we bought personally in a Rajasthan village market 25 yrs ago. Ours is not a weaving but an appliqué with decorative metal-thread stitching. Still, the similarity of motifs – the bird-like shapes, in particular – is striking. (Oops! I hope these words won’t be indexed somewhere. I wouldn’t want some poor student in Hicksville picking it up and writing a thesis about bird-motifs in Rajasthan textiles when all I said was ‘bird-like’!)



You also refer to cross-cultural religious influences. One thing that has struck us during our several trips to the Indian subcontinent is that (with the exception of Jainism) we rarely met a 100% representative of one or other religion – person or temple. There are various mixes of the Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Bo, Christianity … you name it. (A Muslim guide we had explained his participation in Hindu rituals with, “Well, all these Hindus can’t be completely wrong!”) So, for me there would have to be pretty convincing evidence for cultural influences in one particular direction. Northwest India influencing Central Asia? I would prefer the idea that the culture of the overwhelming Islamic, nomadic Moghul invasion from the Central Asian steppes enduringly implanted some of its culture in Rajasthan and Gujarat.

Regards, Trevor

David R E Hunt

Hi Trevor

Not to fear, I'm in the process of working something up. Suffice it to say I suspect that the Khalyk, kapunak, and Asmalyk are more to Mongol than Turkic custom, and know that a primary distinguishing characteristics of Central Asian civilization is that of it's diverse cultural origin. Rest assured that far from being these large and isolated entities, the Indian, and Central Asian civilizations all lie well within each others sphere of influence, be it by history, culture or economics.

In example, the lotus blossom, along with it's modern incarnation, the "Sha Abass" palmett motive, are respectively of direct consequence, and of the influence, of Buddhism. Some members of the Mongol leadership class were Buddist, if memory serves.

For all of their supposid cultural significance, there isn't even a proper Turkic name for these trappings. Asmalyk translates roughly into "hanging" or "to hang" and Khalyk translates into "carpet piece"; the terms are used interchangeably by different Turkmen groups.

Now, as for these bird figures in Rajasthan textiles, aren't they in fact bird motives?...

Dave

James Blanchard

Hi Dave,

What little I know of the Mongol traditions and customs suggests to me the Mongols themselves were predominantly herdsmen who did not have their own tradition of creating textiles and textile designs. Rather, the Mongol conquests assimilated a wide variety of art and craft traditions from across Asia and Europe into their empire, and promoted trade in culture and commerce across the Mongol empire. The Mongol emperors were known to value and utilize artists and craftsmen from within their enlarging empire to create the buildings and art of the Mongol dynasties. So it is likely that textile designs did not have a Mongol origin per se, but under Mongol rule from the Pacific Ocean to Eastern Europe, there was an unprecedented diffusion of art, culture, language and religion that probably accounts for much of the homology in design traditions that we observe.

Having said that, it seems likely that particular Mongol religious and tribal traditions did influence the arts and crafts produced under their rule, because, well, they were in charge of things for some time....

James

Trevor White

Could well be, Dave. I was just trying to give up my habit of asserting something based on a wealth of ignorance. Though, they might just be guppies.

Trevor

David R E Hunt

Hi James

Yes, when I say the custom or use of these trappinga and door surrounds are of Mongol origin, I mean that in the broadest sense, and in relation to the history of Central Asia. The trappings don't seem to proceed from the Turks, at least in respect to the narrow confines of this rather superficial inquiry, and given that the nomadic Turkmen were predominantly of Turk and Mongol origin, the elimination of the Turk component pretty much narrows it down to the Mongol influence.

For what it's worth, the Mongols have, over the course of history, constituted a pretty diverse group of people. What do we call Mongols who arrived with the golden Horde, displace the ruling class of the lands they seize and then procede to set up shop, set down roots, and over the course of a generation or two, take on the customs of the local populace, and adopt their religion as their own? Are they still Mongols? Perhaps Moghul is more appropriate, under the right circumstance?

Dave

James Blanchard

Hi Dave,

My understanding is that the original Mongol empire (under Genghis Khan) created an unprecedented trade in ideas, social and religious customs and arts and crafts across Asia and between Asia and Europe. Perhaps the propensity for the Mongols to adopt and disseminate the arts and craft traditions of others was due to a relative lack of those traditions within their own socio-cultural milieu. This continued with the subsequent dynasties spawned by the Mongol empire in Russia, Persia, China and India (Moghul). So, for example, much of the Moghul art and architecture is not just "inspired" by Persia, but actually created by Persian artists and architects, often drawing on a variety of design traditions.

James

David R E Hunt

Hi James

Found the following, courtesy of Wikipedia, during further armchair research;

Religious syncretism exhibits blending of two or more religious belief systems into a new system, or the incorporation into a religious tradition of beliefs from unrelated traditions. This can occur for many reasons, and the latter scenario happens quite commonly in areas where multiple religious traditions exist in proximity and function actively in the culture, or when a culture is conquered, and the conquerors bring their religious beliefs with them, but do not succeed in entirely eradicating the old beliefs or, especially, practices

and,

Syncretism also occurs commonly in literature, music, the representational arts and other expressions of culture. (Compare the concept of eclecticism.) Syncretism may occur in architecture as well. There also exist syncretic politics, although in political classification the term has a somewhat different meaning.

These links regarding Buddhism in general, and Buddhism in Central Asia in particular, are worth a look. Seems that present day Mongolia is 94% buddhist, of the Tibetan Buddhist variety. This photograph of a doorway to a Tibetin Monestary draws some interesting parallels with these kapunak and Toran.

Notice how textiles are used as decoration in this series of photographs of the Lamayuru, a Tibetan Buddhist Monestary in Kashmir.
This of course doesn't prove anything, but there are a lot of interesting parallels.

Dave

James Blanchard

Hi Dave,

I work quite a bit in China, and more specifically in Sichuan province. In fact, I am in Chengdu right now. Over the past 50 years there has developed a Tibetan diaspora across southern Asia. I think that many of the objects and articles adorning the temples and monasteries are produced in Tibet, and transported around the diaspora. So I am not sure how much syncretism exists, though I expect that some will develop over time. Chengdu has a large Tibetan population, and there is a section of the city that has whole streets full of shops selling Tibetan garments, prayer beads, prayer wheels, "thangkas" (painted religious Buddhist banners), and various door and other textile hangings. Interestingly, I have seldom felt that the textiles and rugs that I see in the Tibetan / Buddhist context have a strong similarity with Indian or Central Asian textiles. The use of colour, designs and formats all seem different to me. I have seldom been tempted to purchase Tibetan textiles. But perhaps my perspective on this is off.

James

David R E Hunt

Hi James

The syncretism took place in the past, and is a primary characteristic of Central Asian history and culture, if memory serves.

Dave

James Blanchard

Hi Dave,

Yes, I think you are right. I was just observing how distinct I find the Tibetan textiles from India and Central Asia. So either the syncretism was limited or at a fairly macro level, or the design traditions diverged subsequently.

James

Rich Larkin

Hi Folks,

Dave, I meant to post in this thread earlier. I don't have any scholarship to add, but I thought your initial set of images was terrific. I note that a few of those embroideries have versions of the two bird/tree motif going on. Such features, along with the suggestive shapes, the vertical pointed lappets, and so on, are much too numerous to be coincidental. Thered has to be some common source or pool of design going on.

Rich Larkin

David R E Hunt

Hi Trevor

I happened to come upon a pentagonal trapping, during my weekly routine, as thus.
It is my understanding that these are refered to as "Ganeshtepana".





It measures 23" across the base and 27" from base to apex.
It was claimed to be an antique, althoughI really don't know how to tell.
I do know that for what I paid for it that it, really doesn't matter from a financial perspective.

The backing cloth looks stamped with some sort of block print.



Seen from the front, this appears a curious object. Alas, much of the silk
embroidery thread is gone, but the outlining is clearly visible and hence the whole of the design.



What I presume to be Ganesh, presiding over the festivities, as it were,
and flanked by his two wives.



The "shisha" or mirrors here seem to discribe the eyes of some odd
bird like creature



Even the sun is sprouting petals



There doesn't seem to be much systematic informarion regarding
the embroidery of the various people of Gujarat available on the internet.
Mention was made, however, of the fact that some embroidery
much resembles the works of the Baluch,and that some of the
embroidery is executed by muslims.

Also, some artists are relatively recent immigrants from areas west,
and some cultural transference is documented.
And yes, while the "Ganeshtepana" is not specifically mentioned,
it is stated that trappings of this type, in general, are intimately
associated with the wedding ceremony.

That's about the scope of my knowledge regarding this interesting artifact.
If anyone can contribute anything more I would enjoy hearing it.

Dave

Michele Hardy

I agree with warning above about collapsing history and assuming similar appearances suggest historic connections! In spite of what these embroidered textiles are called (and no one has offered the Gujarati word or what they are called in any of the many local languages), there are few Buddhists in the area-- Buddhism moved on after the time of Ashoka.

Toran are typically used in Hindu homes-- all of the ones show in this discussion are Hindu-- the motifs and style of embroidery suggest they are from the Kathiawar pennisula-- not Kutch or Sindh. I see various manifestations of Ganesh and Krishna with the Gopis.

There is not much to back my argument up on the web, however many books are available (Emma Tarlo's being a good recent one).

__________________
Michele

Trevor White

Well, lads and lasses,
Looking back over the thread we have covered quite some territory, cultures and eras since I first threw up (oops! you know what I mean ) a carpet supposedly tribal 'Turkman' but not to the cognescenti. We have also brought in quite a bit of zoology and botany - with birds and fish, eyes, flowers, and so on. My own readings have encountered crabs, tarantulas, sunbursts, Czarist coats-of-arms and so on.

It all reflects the main pleasure of carpets and rugs - just looking into them, musing, dreaming, imagining ... exactly as we do when surveying the night sky, the daytime clouds or the evening campfire. We spy and ínterpret a motif. Is its form intentional - or just a chance flicker of flame, a whirl of the wind, a whim of the weaver? And my interpretations? With my British roots will they be the same as Margret's and her Swiss roots? Although born within 4 years of each other and only 1100km apart, we do encounter differences over a wide range of issues - and our countries have not experiences savage colonisations, desperate migrations over centuries. Indeed, it is surprising that any consistency and coherence is found at all. (Didn't someone once argue that the crosses found in rugs from the Mediterranean to the China Sea all originate from a diaspora of Armenian Christians?)

That being said, however, before we go back to enjoying this carpet as we did before, I do want to follow up one last idea. A friend (no expert, just a carpetophiliac) 'saw' Caucasian motifs in our rug. We know little about Caucasian rugs but have seen some very dramatic designs from there and Anatolia. However, there seems to be a dearth of literature on Caucasian rugs. Amazon listed some 2nd-hand publications but for breathtaking megadollars - far too much just to satisfy a final curious idea.

Although Turkomanics, you guys and girls get around so I was wondering if anyone knew of info sources about Caucasian weavings..

After that, I'll keep quiet! ... perhaps!
Regards, Trevor

Oh! P.S. I found a reference (p. 254) to Indian jail rugs in a 1970 reprint of Walter Hawley's 1913 "Oriental Rugs - antique and modern". Also in the Introduction there was also a very lyrical description of the attraction of rugs - and the 19th century discovery of oriental art and culture by Europeans. (Though Asians, Native Americans, etc. may have views on being discovered.) I take it that this book is well-known. It is pack-full of info, but is it reliable?

Filiberto Boncompagni

Hi Trevor,

References on Turkotek about Walter Hawley:

http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00095/salon.html
and
http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00095/s95t2.htm

Cheapest CD/book on Caucasian weavings:

http://www.turkotek.com/VB22/showthread.php?threadid=3104

rather Azero-centered, but it's free!

Regards,

Filiberto

Trevor White

Many thanks for the pointers, Filiberto - much to read ... an' jus' when I was planning on a quiet evening watching Jean Reno save the world.

Have a good weekend yourself as well

BlairAtholl

Trevor

Hope you have something planned for the 20th WA this year?

John & Maureen

Rich Larkin

Hi Trevor,

You inquired about Walter Hawley’s book. The whole business of old rug books is large. If you plan to get really into this stuff, a must read is the chapter on rug books in H. G. Dwight’s Persian Miniatures. It’s Chapter XIII. Here’s the link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=6IdCAAAAIAAJ&dq=Dwight+Persian+Miniatures&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=HZ3vteLjYL&sig=_F14BIoEaOivX-pvKqNT2j4wDp4&hl=en&ei=1smNSfGnC-CbtwfiwLiiCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPP1,M1

You will find that he excoriates the early writers for the most part, excessively to some degree, in my opinion. For example, I think he gives Hawley in particular too little credit. Nevertheless, what he has to say about them is well taken in any foray into those books. Another more recent source that gives a good running commentary on many of the old books is Murray Eiland, Jr.’s, Oriental Rugs, a Comprehensive Guide, also must reading. That book has come out in several editions, the more recent ones in collaboration with his son, I think. A prevailing theme in all of them is the importance of seeing through the blather of misinformation in much of the literature, a concept that had some novelty about it when the first edition came out. Unfortunately, I guess, the more things have changed, the more they have stayed the same, but it is useful for one to acquaint oneself with these points of view.

Rich Larkin

Trevor White

Useful tips, Rich, but for a novice isn't what you say similar to the problem of finding a reliable dealer - and seeing through any blather you get?
It also is a reminder how Forums like Turkotek and its knowledgeable participants are useful. True, I don't always get answers I want but I usually get a clearer picture of the questions I should be asking.
Regards, Trevor