Benjamin Tholen

Hi everybody,

I thought it would be better to continue the discussion on the flatweaves (of possibly kordi origin) in a new thread.
Meanwhile there is another thread by chuck featuring a flatwoven piece used as a wall hanging from norwegian origin, but these seemed to be a little bit to far off that track to post them in the same thread?
Instead I would like to ad another piece I very recently acquired for comparison.

Both pieces have in common that they are flatweaves, probably supposed to be wall hangings and feature some kind of brocading (the exact terminology seems to differ in rug literature, maybe due to my lack of understanding the finer diffrences).

For the first piece I have a basic attribution given by the dealer as being a Jaf - kurd Yurt wall decor, dated approx. 1880.
Now that has allready been questioned, proposing a kordi rather than a jaf origin, and noticing that kurds dont live in yurts after all.

The second piece I found in the darkest corner of a well known berlin auction house and just had to buy it, no matter how broke I allready was
There was no other Information available but a tag calling it "sumakh" and the dimensions of roughly 5 feet square.
Comparing it to other pieces I found online I would say its a cicim from the obruk region, anatolia, but the people at the auction house had no idea.

So this is the first piece, 9.3x5.7ft, frontside:



and the back:



Wich, apart from the heavier wear on the frontside, look very similar to each at first glance, but on closer look one can spot diffrences, as sumakh like loose threads hanging on the backside, but very rarely. Here is a detail from the backside:



and the front:




The basic fabric seems to be a weft faced plain weave, wool on wool, and I dont think any cotton was used in the design threads either, yet I´m not completly sure about the white and will have to burn some maybe.

It has similar kilim endings on top and bottom:



and the selvedges look like this:



Three of four borders feature that same pattern in their design, yet the on the bottom it switches to another symbol:



this symbol, as mentioned in the other thread, reminds me of the cartouche in Richards Caucasian piece and while this is probably pure concidence I still wonder about this symbol (wich differs from the other patterns in this piece) and its origin?



Finally the dealer claims its all natural colors, what seems reasonable to me, and - well- it smells as if the sheep that donated the wool for it is still alive in this piece
Compared especially to the next piece it seems quite heavy for a wall hanging though. I browsed thru some literature to find hints that would help me to determine wether its jaf, or kordi or some other provenance, but found it very hard to find any distinctive features that would allow to specify its origin just by design. In general it seems to me that flatweaves from diffrent regions look much more similar to each other than pile rugs. So any help on this would be great!

Now the next piece seemed even more confusing at first. Its much smaller (about 5ft square) and much more light weight, making it rather unsuitable as a floor covering. It also had Iron rings sewn to its upper "fringe", wich indicate it has been used as a wall hanging before, and actually a long time before, because despite the very good overall condition of the piece, the threads with wich the rings were sewn to the original fabric pulverized by just looking at them... And this is it as a whole:



and looking more closely:



As nobody at the auction house could give any hints on its origin I browsed the net and found a few pieces with similar patterns and colors. The most similar one was from Marla Malletts site, named a Konya/Obruk Cicim, used as a cover or wall hanging and dated 1880:



I tried to read everything I could find online to specify the seemingly diffrent weaving technics employed in this piece. The dealer given label "sumakh" seems to lack some precicion, and at tleast does not cover all of the emploved weaving methods. Most of it seems to be some sort of overlay/underlay brocade, but other techniques seem to appear as well, and after all Im not entirely sure wether the pattern was created on the loom while weaving the basic fabric, or at least parts of it were applied later using a needle?

The pictures of Marlas Piece dont feature enough details and lack pictures from the backside to really compare the structure.

Now what I found intresting is, that the groundfabric does not seem to be weft faced, but rather a balanced plain weave (german: Leinwandbindung") where to my eye the warp threads are actually dominating the structure. I have read elswehere that this was the basic fabric used for pieces called "verneh" so I looked at some online wich showed similarites, yet not as closely as marla malletts cicim.

In this detail it should be possible to judge the structure of the basic fabric:



but also looking at the (non existant) selvedges and the bottom fringe may help:





Talkin about end finishes, the top finish seems to be wrapped and sewn over, while the warp threads appear at the sides! :




Here we can also see the last remaining Iron ring. Both pictures were obviously taken from the back, wich looks like this as a whole:



Now obviously the colors on the back are much more saturated, wich indicates some serious fading of the frontside. Yet the colors (after fading) seem very similar to those in marlas piece and I would really like to see it from the back.
From what I recently read about natural dyes, they too seriously fade if exposed to light, and after a 50 years of average exposure to sunlight of a wall hanging like this, it would be mellowed as it is, even if made with natural dyes. Still I am very keen to hear what our resident experts might have to say about this?
The lack of any pure white in the piece, and instead a "rosé" tint on what would be expected to be white, might also hint on color bleeding after a wash? Yet as the bleeding, if any, is very, very even it would indicate some throughout washing during wich the bleeding occured, maybe a washing with unsuitable detergents/temprature etc. ?
After all the mellowed colors, as well as the unfaded back, seem very beautifull.
Interesting detail is that of two shades of blue used alongside each other, the paler one has nearly completly faded. Now asuming that indigo is supposed to be rather lightfast and that natural indigo is nearly Identical to artifical, I wonder why the pale blue seems to have faded stronger than any other color including the yellow?

Regarding the origin of the piece I read that in anatolia each region has its specific patterns and that the weavers tend to stick to that tradtion very closely so I assume that Obruk region maybe a right guess? On the other hand this "stability" in pattern makes it much harder to extract an age estimate by looking at the pattern?

I also wonder what might have been the original useage the piece was made for?

Any help or ideas would be great!

best
Benjamin

ps. Some of the picture links appear to be broken, but I hope Steve can help me to find the bug later....

Joel Greifinger

Hi Benjamin,

Starting with your first, possibly Kordi piece, here are the two pieces that I posted on the previous thread from Tanavoli's Persian Flatweaves for comparison. They are both Kordi and structurally mix weft-float brocading, knotted weft-wrapping and reverse weft-wrapping on weft-faced plain weave. The first is woven in one piece and measures 9'10" x 5'3", similar to yours. Tanavoli says that they are used as floor coverings:





Tanavoli mentions that having these multiple structures in alternating patterns is characteristic of, while not limited to, the floor coverings from Khorasan.

Could you post a complete picture of the front of the second piece?

Joel Greifinger

Benjamin Tholen

Dear Joel,

I would say you are right about the usage as a floor cover rather then a wall hanging. The dimensions as well as wear pattern and to me the heaviness of the fabric as well support this.
Regarding the Jaf attribution I mailed the dealer and got a very diffuse answer ala - "well, its kurdish wether kordi or jaf" - so I suppose his attribution may be derived from the slight similarity the pattern has with typical jaf bagfaces and jaf being a name relatively well known with collectors.
Now from what I recall, khorassan is eastern iran, close to afghanistan rather than the jaf tribe being situated more in southwestern iran and irak?
Is it the same origin then as what is usually called kurdish quchan?

The pictures of the second piece seemingly didnt get mailed, but will be online soon...


best

benjamin

Marla Mallett

Benjamin,

You've asked how the Konya cicims were used. These brocaded pieces differ significantly in size. I have a piece about the size of yours--about 4 feet by 5 feet--that has a diamond design. Pieces this size were normally hung vertically to cover wall niches--i.e. cupboards.

Many of these Konya cicims are much larger, however. The example of mine with large stars is actually almost 6 feet by 13 feet, although you have posted just a portion of it above. I have others which are huge also: one is 11 feet 4 inches long, and another is 14 feet 5 inches long. These were usually used horizontally as hangings that covered a series of storage shelves lining one wall in the village house.

These cicims are overlay-underlay brocading on warp-predominant grounds. All of the ornamentation is WOVEN. It is NOT embroidery done afterwards with a needle.

Best,
Marla Mallett

Jack Williams

About your first piece, one characteristic of many "Kordi" pile rugs is the red-flat weave ends, often with a Baluch-style line of brocade. Another Kordi pile-rug structural marker may be warps that use a hodge-podge of different materials, especially some goat hair, and some of this or that wool, and whatever, so that the warp ends visually are a collection of different colored, mottled, stuff. Your kilim seems to have a similar feature.

Keep in mind that the "Kordi" (Kurds of N.E. Khorrison) actually include more than 8 major tribal groups, and literally hundreds of minor ones, spread over a 300 mile x 100 mile area, often migrating 200 miles between summer and winter camps. Most of these Kordi tribes apparently originated with the "North Western Kurds" of Anatolia and Azerbjan-Caspian areas according to Stanzer, hence the archaic similarity of Kordi motifs with Malayta etc.

In pile rugs, there seems to be three general Kordi patterns, broadly speaking ... (1) Kordi-Afshar-Turkman; (2) Kordi-Baluch; and for lack of a better term, (3) Kordi-NW Kurd. This reflects the pile-rug influence on the Kordi tribes of the other weaving cultures that heavily dot N. Khorrison - Baluch, Afshar, Amaiq, Garili (?), Lurs, Yomut, etc.

Trouble is, although an expanse of red flat weave ends seems to be a marker for "Kordi" pile rugs, and possibly even kilims, etc., it may also be a feature of some Western Kurd flatweaves - I just don't know. And Western Kurdish ethnography is a nightmare of hundreds of tribes, many with vastly different techniques. But if this were a pile rug, I would guess it to be "Kordi-Baluch" because the limited use of yellow probably moves it south of the Afshar zone.

Stanzer's great book, "KORDI", identifies some specific techniques related to Kordi flatweaves. For instance, he writes that slit tapestry techinique is pretty much limited to the Darreh Gaz (also Afshar territory - the first kilim posted by Joal is possibly from this area). Use of knotted weft-wraping is usually from the Lain area, Sufianlu, Shaikhanlu or Zifanlu tribes (the second kilim posted by Joal may be from the Lain area based on pastel colors, etc.).

He also notes the difficulty of attributing a kilim woven using weft-wrapping, divided by narrow weft-twining and brocaded intermediary stripes. He writes that the Milanlu also used these techniques that were otherwise usually associated with Lain (and the above mentioned tribes).

There are other details in Stanzer's book that seemingly define details characteristics of Kordi flat weaves. I recommend finding a copy, and also a copy of Marla's book. Absent some knowledge of basic loom technology, it can be hard to differentiate some of the techniques, but her knowledge of flat-weaves is pretty much unchallanged in my opinion.

All that said, I admit that I know little about flat-weaves in general. I couldn't tell you the details of this piece of mine, which is definitely not "Kordi," but may be Anatolian Kurdish... which could be why it has a distant-cousin type similarity to your Kilim.






Honestly, I'm not even sure why I bought it as it isn't Baluch or Afshar ... but it is attractive, at least to me (the last thing I need in my life is to become as fascinated by the Kurds as I am by Baluch and Afshar).

As an aside, Benjaman, there is a 12-step program for rug addiction, but in your case, I think it is too late.

By the way, I recommend you only rarely actually believe a dealer, absent long association and your own thorough research. This guy with his "kurdish yurts," and other seemingly misinformation is likely a ... well ... "rug dealer." I recommend you buy the rug, not the story. You do seem to have done well in your aquisitions though.

Regards, Jack

Benjamin Tholen

Dear Jack,

my first aquistion ever was a pile rug with a zig zag or wave like pattern. The guy selling it, working a a restaurator, told me its kurdish. Now it has a red flat weave on one end, while the other ending has been replaced with a new fringe - what he honestly pointed out to me despite the fact that at this point I had no Idea of such details no matter how. Once I am back from vacation I will post pictures of it, as it may be of kordi orgin as well? I love it for its colors wich most of my later aquisitons failed to even come close to.

As to the piece u posted - a very beautifull one if u ask me - I am still quiet lost regarding the attribution of flatwoven pieces as they seem to share more common heritage between distant areas than most pile rugs.

Regarding the 12 step program - I might need help - Sometimes I sit at home staring at a pattern for about an hour

Meanwhile I wait for my copy of Marlas "Woven Structures" and will take a look at Wilfired Stanzers Book in the Library because I couldnt find any reasonably priced copy online.

Dear Marla,

first of all I hope that my bold usage of a picture from your webpage as "public domain" was ok? I posted the detail instead of the whole piece because I wanted to focus on the similarity in pattern and it was my closest call on coming to any kind of possible attribution.

Now If I may continue being so frank, I would like to ask if any pictures of the back of this piece exist or if you can tell me wether a similar diffrence in color saturation between front and backside of the piece exists or is commonly found with such pieces?

This cicim is very dear to me. It has kind of a hypnotic effect. The pattern with its irregularitys is strangely alive. So I would like to find out whatever I can about it.

Best Regards
Benjamin

Marla Mallett

Hi Benjamin,

Posting the cicim was no problem. I'll send detail photos to Steve for posting.

Best,
Marla

Steve Price

Hi All

Here are the detail photos from Marla:









Thanks, Marla.

Steve Price

Marla Mallett

Since the flatweaves being discussed here can cause considerable confusion, I'll say a bit about the structures/techniques used. Although the sturdy weft-faced Kurdish pieces like Benjamin's Khorassan rug and Jack's Malatya piece from eastern Anatolia have similar designs, the means of achieving them are quite different.

1. Jack's Malatya piece is overlay-underlay brocading. So are Benjamin's and my Konya/Obruk cicims. The weaver first puts in a shot of her ground weft. Then she INTERLACES the pattern wefts, one by one, all across the loom. The yarns float on the front surface (sometimes just over three warps, sometimes more), and then float on the back to the next place they are needed--thus the name "overlay-underlay." When the pattern parts are narrow, as in most of Jack's piece, the yarns are just left dangling on the back after a single float. When the weaver has completed all of the separate small pattern parts across the loom, she puts in another ground weft, and she's ready to begin the next row of patterning. With narrow pattern parts, nearly every separately colored pattern yarn just reverses direction with each new row. Thus on the back of brocaded pieces we normally see a messy assortment of floats and small "dots" where the pattern yarns reversed. This is the kind of brocading most widely used around the world. The ground weaves may be balanced weaves, warp-predominant weaves (as in the Obruk Cicims), or heavy weft-faced weaves (as in Jack's Malatya piece).

2. Benjamin's Kurdish Khorassan rug is soumak. It's obviously quite different from the soumak that most of us are familiar with in the panels of the typical Shahsevan mafrash. In those mafrash panels the ground wefts are tiny and normally completely hidden by densely worked wrapping yarns. In other kinds of soumak the ground weave is prominent, and the soumak wrapping just forms linear motifs on the surface. Some Persian and Caucasian horse covers, with their charming animal figures, exemplify this. Benjamin's Khorassan rug, with its geometric patterning, is also such a piece. The weaver puts in a shot of ground weft, then WRAPS small groups of warps with her colored yarns--one color at a time, all across the loom. With these individual yarns left dangling, she then puts in another ground weft. Then she wraps each small design part again, one by one, across the loom. Since each wrapping encircles its warp group completely, the design is often clearly articulated on the back of the piece--as in Benjamin's Khorassan rug. Soumak ground weaves can be a balanced weave, a warp-predominant weave, or a weft-faced weave, as in the Khorassan rugs.

In rug literature, both of these kinds of work have been erroneously called "embroidery." This is NOT correct. The work is all done on the loom, meticulously row by row, and NOT afterwards with a needle.

Quite different-looking soumak is done by some Kurds in NW Persia. These pieces display both horizontal and diagonal wrapping. Several varieties of soumak and brocading are illustrated and discussed in my book, since technical variations are critical to making attributions. This publication was about to disappear forever, but I've just now completed a new short press run.

If I've been unclear above, let me know and I'll try again. It's much easier to demonstrate than explain.

Best,
Marla

Marla Mallett

I forgot one thing above. Usually with brocaded designs, another technique is used for solid horizontal pattern lines. They are most often soumak. In my Obruk piece above, the solid color horizontals are reverse soumak. The two-color horizontal lines in this piece are chained. Sometimes in brocaded pieces horizontal lines are twined.

Marla

Steve Price

Hi People

Patrick Weiler is preparing the essay for a Mini-Salon into which this discussion thread will fit nicely, and we expect to have it up and running in less than a week. Before this thread lurches off into too many directions, I'm going to close it to new posts, move it into the discussion part of the upcoming Mini-Salon when it arrives, then reopen the thread.

Thanks

Steve Price

Joel Greifinger

Hi all,

Back at the beginning of this thread, Benjamin posted a large soumak rug that appears to be the work of the Kurds of Khorassan. Here is another piece that I presume to be Kordi. It's a chuval the front of which is largely covered by bands of soumak with occasionally intervening bands of striped weft-faced plainweave. There are also simple designs on narrow bands of plainweave of the sort that Marla described earlier where the soumak wrapping just forms linear motifs on the surface. The piece measures 36" x 30".





Here's what it looks like from the other side of the front:



The back is made up of narrow stripes of brown, green and black plainweave.

While the piece has a lot of different colors, it gives a fairly dark impression. It contains some sparing use of white, but the overall palette and use of black weft shots gives it the look that Stanzer ascribes to a particular subset of Kordi tribes: the Qarajorlu, Pahlevanlu, Malevanlu, Bajkanlu and Tupkanlu (Kordi p.216)

Joel Greifinger

Benjamin Tholen

Hi All,

Thanks to Patrick Weilers and Marlas help, as well as some addtional literature most of my questions regarding the structural aspects of the pieces have been solved.

What remains are certain questions about the Konya/Obruk Cicim (similar pieces are called zili elswhere and in fact it seems to employ cicim, zili and sumak technices in combination), regarding a possible time frame and place of origin.

Now diffrent publishings (Brüggemann, Belkis Balpinar Acar) claim, that nomadic/village anatolian pieces and especially flatweaves, having been produced for personal usage rather then market, show a very strong continutiy in design over a very long time.
Some authors even claim, that specific styles in patterning of flatweaves were used to express a tribal identity and that rarely a foreign element would have been included in the weaving unless an important event in tribal history took place.

So far I have only found a hand full of similar pieces online and in books. All of them are attributed to more or less the same area around konya / obruk.
I have discoverd very similar patterns in parts of anatolian pile rugs as well, attributed to central and western anatolia (but not only the konya area).
All this pieces were attributed to the 19th century, some late, some early.
(probably due to the fact that anything published in books is antique

Yet bearing in mind that Brügemann claims that most nomads/seminomands gave up pile weaving, while quiet a few of them still produce flatweaves, and taking into account the stabilty of their patterning traditions the fact that all other similar pieces are dated before 1900 doesnt say much about the age of this piece.

That would leave it to the colors / condition to determine age.
As the piece has probably only been used on the wall by everybody who ever may have "posessed" it including the peoople who wove it, there obviously wont be much wear.

Yet there is quite some fading of the colors. In fact the diffrences between front and backside are pretty dramaitc.
Despite this the way they faded doesnt look similar to what Ive seen on pieces with early chemical dyes.
The piece I posted from marla seems to have very similar colors, thats why I asked about pictures of its backside, wich she kindly provided.
Now I was quite shocked to find that with her piece the colors on the back where as "mellow" as on the front. My first conclusion was that this means her piece was made this way, while mine had just faded to it due to the use of less light fast (chemical) dyes.
At second thought that doesnt make much sense.

Looking at anatolian pile rugs - and taking into account what Brüggemann writes about their colors - the expected colors of anatolian nomadic pieces would be much more what "my" piece looks like - from the back.
Why should the weaver express a diffrent taste in color on a flat weave than a pile rug? (unless targeting a marked, what doesnt make sense in this example for many reasons)
So I´d rather assume that marlas piece, being pretty old, has mellowed/faded on both sides during time. (usage? storage?)

In general I would assume that the colors on such flat weaves might fade quicker than on pile rugs, as far more (nearly the entire) surface of the colored yarn is constantly exposed to the sun, while with a pile rug its only the tips, especially with very dense pile?

Yet I have to admit that Im not sure if this can stand up with observing older kilims, but also the use of these pieces as wall hangings might lead to them getting more exposure to the sun?

I know we have gone over the dye issue quite some times, and it may be bothersome for the more experienced readers, but I am still curious about all the diffent contradictions.
Like: early chemicals faded very quickly, while later chemical dyes didnt "mellow" at all and so on.
Leaving aside the aspect of diffrent exposure to sunlight (or other hazourdus effects and oxidation?) I still wonder if there is no typologie of chemical dyes, regarding the point in time when they dominated the market (bringing up the problem of nomadic usage in diffent time frames) and their expected lightfastness, compared to natural dyes (and the diffrences inbetween these natural dyes?)

One interesting aspect in this piece for example are the diffrent shades of blue:
In two of the Octagon/star shapes we can see blocks (diffrent size) of blue that has not faded so much, while the rest of what was supposed to be a blue star, has nearly lost all its color.
On the back the shades of blue also differ, but I wonder if this was already so obvious during the process of weaving? I assume this effect just became obvious later as a result of fading, originating either in diffrent dyes or dying process.
Ive seen a very similar effect in the gul of an supposedly antique ersari carpet (rather small size, goathair warps, liver colored field, very simple gülli göls with only two instead of the usual three "branches" in each gul compartment):
All of the supposedly blue gul fields have faded to nearly grey, but one of them is partly deep blue, yet not entirely...

Now I wonder if this has to do with irregularitys during the dye bath, or another indigo (Indigosulfric acid?) or another blue chemical dye (less lightfast???) having been used alongside natural dyed indigo???

According to brüggemann indigo sulfirc acid in an anatolian piece would also higher the chance of cochinal being used in the same piece.
Now alongside the (many diffrent) shades of supposedly madder red that have been used for the cicims plain weave foundation, there is a blueish red used in part of the design that has nearly completly mellowed on the frontside but is still vibrant on the back.

Now if this means cochinal was used in this piece it would, according to brügemann, hint on a timeframe of 1850 to 1890, with a later date being possible but inprobable, whilst an earlier date could be excluded. Yet I have no evidence for the red being cochinelle but wild guessing and the fact that its blueish in hue and very diffrent from the shades of red used in the foundation.

Now a last thing hints on the use of chemical dyes: red bleeding.
Its obvious that all the parts of the design that are white in marlas piece are pale rosé in mine. As the beleeding is very even I suppose it came from the foundation rather then the blue-red design threads, but I am not sure.

What makes me wonder is this: The "rosé" is exactly the same shade on the front of the piece, as on the back.
Now this could mean two things:
a)the red that was bleeding was more lightfast than any of the other colors (including the red of the foundation that has not faded much, but a bit at some places)
b) The bleeding has occured during a wash that has taken palce rather recently

Now I have read diffrent opinions claiming that a bleed like this can happen with natural dyes just as well as with chemical once, presuming an overexecess of not rinsed dye.
Chemial or not I believe an excess of unrinesd dye can be held responsible for the bleed (during a wash) in that case, and that it came from the foundation that showas a lot of very diffrent hues of brownish red, some of wich seem extremly saturated.

Now I know that I have the tendency to see what I want to see
During the discussion of the first piece I had here in the show and tell (the belouch), I tried to find any possible way to get around having to admit to myself that at least some chemical dyes have been used in that one (pretty well used as I still think).
So after all Im not sure about the colors here.From what Ive looked at so far, they seem natural to me, despite the bleeding.

Its strange to say that about a piece you "own", but I have to admit I really love it. I use it as a wall hanging to cover an unused door in my living room, and whenver people come in, (nearly all of wich otherwise believed collecting rugs to be a rather odd thing ) they get nearly as hypnotized by it as I do. Especially when sunlight fills the room it starts to "glow" and one friend had the impression that the piece was "in motion" while standing still.
So assuming that this peice is of rather young age, but produced under specific conditions, I feel it has a lot of what I saw in older pieces so far (most of wich I could never afford), and that basically, how ever wrong communism may have went marx was right with his theory of "entfremdung" due to modern industrial production ("arbeitsteilung" ) and what it does to the worker, and in our case, to the product as well...

well, anyhow I would be more than thankfull for any hint on the issues mentioned...
One last thing: The faded tips of the end finish, where the red is gone, show a yellowish/golden wool, a bit like blond hair, is that what you call tan wool or maybe camel hair?

Regarinding Joels Piece, I find it to be an extremly nice piece of its kind.
An eye opener. Let me explain:
My taste in rugs may lack "focus".
There are kaukasian peices that I find really, really great (but far beyond my budget). Yet, with a lot of others I feel like people are buying them because its what u should buy. No matter if the piece is dead or alive.
On the other hand most (later) turkmen pieces I saw seemed to have a stiffness about them that I found pretty boring - untill I saw some that, within their "rules" where just amazing. Especially in their "reduced" palette. And once u discover that, its like learning a langugae. Thats also how I am growing more and more fond of belouch and so on.
Now Joels Piece to me is such an eye opener.
I cant say anything smart about, just: gorgeous!

best

benjamin

Pierre Galafassi

Hi Benjamin,

Many of your questions concerning dyes and dyeing process will perhaps find an answer in Salon 129 («Wool dyeing history, with focus on dyeing of rugs») especially in the second half of this salon and in the lively discussions which followed. (Turkotek archives).
I shall be happy to try to answer any residual question, would you still have any.

As a quick and dirty introduction to Salon 129, merely allow me a few general considerations relating to the main questions mentioned in your post (light- and wet fastness).

Except for the very first synthetic dyes, the so-called «anilin dyes» (triphenyl-methan dyes); there is no clearcut lightfastness differentiation between early synthetic dyes and natural dyes used for carpet wool.

The bright and strong Triphenyl-methan dyes were massively introduced in Turkey, Iran, India etc.. shortly after their invention (1860 onward). They featured- by far- the worst lightfastness of any natural or synthetic dye ever used on wool and they also had a tendency to «run». Some local governments eventually banned them in utter despair. These dyes are easy to identify on rugs since they haven’t slowly mellowed under exposure to light but have quickly turned an ugly mottled beige or grey. Their shrieking original shades can rarely be identified on any old rug since even the shade of the back has usually severely changed.

Less than a couple of decades later the second generation of synthetic wool dyes («acid dyes») took over most of the market. Their light-fastnesses were, in general, similar to those of natural dyes (*) or better. The most borderline being a few scarlet and orange dyes. Several commercially important acid dyes of that period (1875-1920), especially red and magenta ones had a strong tendency to run although improved acid dyes kept being introduced at a fast pace in the market, replacing the worst ones.
Many acid dyes (old- and modern ones) feature bright shades. In some cases, (especially orange, royal blue, turquoise, ...) they can be much brighter than similar shades made with natural dyes. But it would still be wrong to make brightness a sure marker for synthetic dyes.
Some (few) recipes using natural dyes can yield pretty shrieking shades too (lemon yellows for example).

After 1920 a third generation of synthetic dyes was introduced (so-called migrating 1/1 chrome complex dyes), superior in both light- and wet fastness (as well as quite cheap and easy to use) to the earlier synthetic dyes and to the best natural dyes (only indigo can compare to them in both fastnesses). These dyes were further improved over the years and replaced early synthetic dyes in about all industrial (carpet-) wool dye-houses. These 1/1 Cr dyes dyes do not feature particularly bright shades. They are -at best- only marginally brighter than most of the traditional natural dyes used by Asian weavers.

Locally, even today some Asian artisans or nomads may still use some older "acid" dyes and even the odd «anilin dye».
Natural dyes kept being used only by very few artisans or nomads until ecology became fashionable a couple of decades ago (**).

(*) Light-fastness rating 3 (medium-low) to 4-5 (medium) on the so-called «wool blue scale». The "blue scale" goes from rating 1 (lousy light-fastness) to 8 (perfect light-fastness)

(**) Ecology of natural dyes vs. synthetic dyes is a rather interesting topic too, but fully OT here.

mit freundlichen Grüssen.
Pierre

Marla Mallett

Benjamin,

I'll try to address a couple of your points/questions. As I mentioned before, large Konya cicims, like the one of mine posted on this thread, were often used as hangings to cover walls of otherwise open shelving. In Central Anatolian village houses, there is not much of a chance for these inside back walls to ever receive much sunlight. These small village houses typically have only tiny windows, and they are rarely in the storage sections. The prominent use of white cotton in the patterning is especially effective in these quite dark rooms, as is a generally light palette. Other Konya cicims have been made with white grounds, for the same reason. Smaller pieces, made to cover wall niches, were likely to receive more sunlight.

I have another large Konya cicim, very closely related to the one posted on this thread, and probably of about the same late 19th century vintage: www.marlamallett.com/w-8278.htm. The patterning is large repetitive diamonds, rather than big star medallions, but the weaves and the palettes are almost identical. The warp-predominant ground in each is a muted terra cotta produced with madder, and the brocading is predominantly white cotton, pale yellow green, and dark indigo blue, with smaller amounts of various pale tints. They also both include a coral color that is common in pieces from that area made by "madder with decreased purpurin"--whatever that means; it's what dye expert Harald Bohmer has told me. On neither of these very large cicims has there been noticeable fading--on either the back or front. It's easy to lift brocading yarns and look underneath for stronger color. Since both of these pieces are so large, and have survived in near perfect condition, it's clear that they weren't subjected to outdoor use. I have a couple more Konya cicims--smaller ones, about the size of yours. That shown at www.marlamallett.com/w-7388.htm also has a diamond motif, and the same palette, plus a soft madder-based aubergine. (In later pieces this was often copied with a brighter synthetic purple which faded with light exposure.) There is no fading on either side of these pieces and all are free from dye runs. These Turkic nomad groups did not weave pile carpets until quite some time after settling, so a comparison with the palettes on those rugs is not relevant.

It is very unusual for central Konya pieces from the second half of the 19th century to include cochineal dyes. Cochineal was common in Anatolian pieces from the Eskishehir/Sivrihisar area to the west (Mexican cochineal came via the Canary Islands starting in about 1845), and also from the Malatya area and other places to the east and southeast of Konya Province (with cochineal from the Ararat area).

It's a mistake to assume that each weaving group produced just its own pattern--with motifs unique to that region. I've never visited Anatolian tribal weavers who were content to weave just ONE kind of piece. With a weaving life of 30 or even 40 years, most women have been eager to try a variety of things, and don't hesitate to incorporate interesting features that they've seen in a market or elsewhere. I've known Anatolian weavers with quite large design repertoires and looking through their family "heirlooms" we see considerable variety. Though some of the weavings may include motifs more typical of other places, their distinctive color palettes, materials, weave balance and formats make the pieces easily identifiable as from THEIR families and their areas.

The structure in these cicims is overlay-underlay brocading. Some writers may carelessly call pieces with checked areas "zili" but that is a loom-controlled weave that features "over-three- under- one" brocade sequences, with the floats aligned vertically. Zili pieces are easily recognized by the prominent "corded" feature in the weave.

Marla

Joel Greifinger

Hi Benjamin,

Here's another piece similar to yours from Flatweaves of Turkey . It's about the same size (161 x 120 cm.) and is 3/3 overlay-underlay brocading (although attributed as an "Obruk Zili"). Bandsma and Brandt's description of it concludes,"With their long fringes at one end and lack of fringes at the other, such pieces as these are obviously designed as hangings - in some cases, small loops for attaching them to walls are added to the end without fringes."



Joel Greifinger

Marla Mallett

Joel and Benjamin,

This Brandsma piece demonstrates the transition from the gentle 19th century Konya /Obruk/Karapinar natural dye cicim palette of terra cotta, coral, pale green, white, indigo etc. to the more strident synthetic reds and oranges of the early and mid-20th century. This is the kind of piece that is most readily available in the warehouses of Istanbul now--pieces from the 1930s, 40s and 50s. It's also the kind of piece we are more likely to find severely faded on one face, or farmed out by merchants to be "sun faded," in which case both sides are faded and the surfaces have the tell-tale "gritty" look.

Unfortunately, it's difficult to get a good idea of the actual textile colors in the Brandsma book, as the printer has been more concerned with a handsome publication than accurate representations of the weavings. It's a common problem. Nearly everything is brighter and more saturated than in real life--uniformly so throughout the book.

Marla

Benjamin Tholen

Dear Marla, Joel, Pierre,

Thanks a lot for ur help wich answers more ore les all my questions.
Taking into account especially the information Marla provided on the coloring of similar peices, I would now put mine into the first half of the 20th century and assume that while the foundation featuring the brick tones very similar to her older pieces may have been dyed with natural colors, most of the design threads may be chemically dyed, with rather "early" chemical dyes. That would make a pre WWII date probable but not certain from what Ive learned so far.

Yet the question about the diffrent shades of blue remains. Keeping in mind that synthetic indigo is more ore less identical to natural one in the relevant aspects, I wonder if another synthetic dye has been used alongside indigo (natural or not) in the same piece? Or if we should attribute the diffrent fading behaviour to diffrent quality of dyeing? In the great salon 129 - (wich I could have read before anyhow, sorry for that) - it has been mentioned that poorley dyed indigo might only cover the surface of the fiber and therefore be more sensetive to fading?

Even in Marlas Piece, looking at the borders, it seems as if some of what should be blue has faded, while most of it is perfectly saturated? (or is that a misperception of mine on the photo?)

Regarding the aesthtic qualitys of such cicims, new or old, I think that pictures cant really capture the beauty of these weavings, lacking their slight 3 dimensonality, due to the nature of the weaving.

The thing is, that I just have aquired a small ersari. It arrived today. Foundation really seems to be goathair (no ply!), weft is brown wool. Some stains, reds have mellowed but no color run. (also after I just washed it with rather warm water and dishwashing liquid, because it was very, very, stained.)
Yet in the gülli göls (ever anybody seen any with only two "branches? - I only found one attribute to end of 19th centuy with bausback) what should have been blue is so in only one of the gül compartments, while all the others have faded to a bluish grey, even on the back). So far Im not sure if there even ever was a blue anilin dye? Or what other shades of blue might fade so much?


On a more general level the question of dyeing still seems very contradictonary, and whilst I tryed to look at a lot of real pieces in museums and elswhere, and thought I made some progress regarding the "experienced eye test", I would have easyily been fooled by this piece, even looking at its back, if it wasnt for the bleeding maybe. Well, one day...

By the way Marlas Explanation of openness to new designs from the viewpoint of the women waeving them, is very convincing, and so sadly I have to give up on yet another theory from my books, or at least modify it

Thanks again to everybody and liebe grüße an pierre!

Pierre Galafassi

Hi Marla

Quoting your post: «....They also both include a coral color that is common in pieces from that area made by "madder with decreased purpurin"--whatever that means».....;

Harald Böhmer’s analytical data identifying «madder with decreased purpurin» can be explained by three main phenomenons, which do not exclude each others:

A) Different botanical varieties of Rubia contain various types and various relative concentrations of (closely chemically-related but not identical) red dyes, mainly alizarin, purpurin, pseudo-purpurin, munjistin, xanthopurpurin, rubiadine and morindone. All these dyes feature somewhat different shades of red with alum mordant and different shades as well with other mordants (iron, tin, copper etc..).

For example: Fresh adult Rubia tinctoria roots (madder) contain mainly alizarin and pseudo-purpurin, very little purpurine, munjistin and rubiadine and neither xanthopurpurine nor morindone.
Fresh Rubia peregrina (wild madder) contains mainly pseudo-purpurine, lower concentrations of purpurine, munjistin and xanthopurpurine, only traces of alizarine and no morindone.
Rubia cordifolia (manjeet) contains similar concentrations of purpurine, pseudo-purpurine and munjistin but hardly any of the other dyes.

One must also remember that the dye composition of fresh roots varies with the age of the plant and even differs between surface-, middle- and core of the root as well as between thick roots and thin ones. Not to mention the geology of the soil, the climate, the date of harvest and the competence of the
tribe’s shaman.

B) Pseudo-purpurine is not a very stable molecule, it tends to be transformed into purpurine when exposed long enough to heat or fermentation . Such a
reaction takes place during the usual «hot» dyeing process (60° to 100°C ), but also before dyeing during «fermentation» of the fresh roots in barrels, or during their «steaming». Both process were used by pre-industrial madder-producers to lend to the dye a shade more favored by their customers (redder).

C) The various red dyes present in the various botanical species feature slightly different dyeing properties: To make it simple, they do compete for the access to the fiber and some are just quicker and cleverer than others . Thus, depending on dyeing conditions (duration of dyeing process, temperature, water hardness etc...) at end of the process the relative concentration of dyes will vary and be different from the initial relative dye concentration in the madder root.

In the case which you described Marla, the coral shade was most probably obtained with Rubia tinctoria on wool mordanted with alum, using a cold dyeing process. Indeed, under these specific conditions a Rubia tinctoria-based dye-bath contains very little purpurin and much pseudo-purpurin.


Hi Benjamin,

I guess that poor lightfastness of blue must be quite rare on indigo dyed wool. While it is true that «surface indigo» has poorer light-fastness (and rubbing fastness) than «truly dyed» indigo (dye inside the fiber) it would need an exceptionally moronic dyer to obtain a wool showing large patches of un-dyed wool, merely covered with surface indigo pigment. An event all the more unlikely since indigo was mostly dyed by professional dyers who sold dyed wool to nomads or village weavers. The main reason for this trend being the cost of the (imported) indigo and the rather peculiar «vat dyeing» indigo process which is not easy to perform by nomads. O’Donovan describes such dyer’s streets all covered with blue and green textiles and skeins in nineteenth century northern Persian cities.

When poor light- and wet fastness of a blue shade is identified on a carpet, the main suspects should always be first either «saxon blue» (semi-synthetic sulfonated indigo) or «anilin dyes » (triphenyl-methan dyes). The latter group indeed contains some violet, blue and green dyes with the characteristically awful light-fastness and borderline wet-fastness. Some early dull blue/navy blue "acid " dyes whith rather poor light fastness may have been used for carpet wool too, but I am not sure about that.(No analytical evidence known to me)

«Saxon blue» was mainly used for green, greenish blue and turquoise shades. I have no experience with the way its shade degrades. My wild guess is that it keeps a reasonably blue shade and merely loses intensity over time. While blue «anilin dyes» surely go quickly mottled grey or beige.
Traces of blue «running» (poor wet fastness) rather hint to saxon blue than to «anilin» blue (the latter can «run» too but the pale-blue «run» would be very quickly «bleached» by light.
Best regards
Pierre

Marla Mallett

Thanks Pierre. One more question: In the last couple of years, I've been hearing more Turks from Central Anatolia insist that the blues in their kilims were dyed with WOAD. I can't find my copy of Harold's dye book to know whether he covers that or not. Do you know how or where woad might fit into the current discussion? And whether it fades or not? I've always thought that indigo dyed colors only lightened because of abrasion, and not fading. Is woad entirely different? Are a color's wearing/fading qualities possibly a clue to the use of woad rather than indigo?

Best wishes,
Marla

Unregistered

hi all

i'd like to take this opportunity to ask a question regarding synthetics.

the following small mat ( 1x1 feet ) contains lots of synthetics.









if you look at the front, the field is a natural brown colour and the middle border is green and ivory.

looking at the images of the back, one can see that there is a brown/purple dye in the field that has faded to the brown and a purple in the border that's faded to a white/ivory.

QUESTION : have the purple and brown/purple dyes abraded off and returned the wool to it's original colours, or have the dyes bleached the wool to the new colours of brown and ivory.

by the way, is this kurdish? has cotton warps (on 2 levels - weird)

regards
richard tomlinson

Pierre Galafassi

Hi Marla

Quote : «Do you know how where woad might fit into the current discussion?»

Woad (Isatis tinctoria) is only one of a very high number of plants throughout all continents which contain the precursor of the blue dye (indigotin ) present in commercial indigo. Isatis tinctoria was for quite some time the main source of indigo in Europe, Caucasus , Turkey etc.., until cheaper indigo was imported from India and later from America.

All natural (whatever the botanical species) and synthetic (whatever the synthesis process) qualities of indigo contain exactly the same blue molecule, which has exactly the same chemical properties and therefore the same fastness on wool. The main differences between all these qualities are merely:
- the dye concentration: It is much easier and cheaper to obtain a quality with a very high concentration of dye when starting with indigofera spp (indian indigofera) for example than with Isatis tinctoria sp. Which explains why european producers could not compete against Indian ones.
- the concentration of the red impurity (indirubin), which of course has some (limited) influence on the shade of blue obtained.

The other impurities which can be dirt, tannin or various vegetal substances, cannot be expected to influence significantly the fastness, but surely can make the work of the dyer more or less complicated.

Properly dyed on wool, indigo has a good abrasion fastness and a good, but not outstanding light-fastness (roughly comparable with the light-fastness of madder or perhaps a trifle better). A very poor abrasion fastness of indigo on wool is probably the exception and does speak volumes about the dyer’s err...talent.
Please do not confuse indigo dyeing on wool with its dyeing on cotton. Especially with the peculiar dyeing process used for cotton denim. The latter is indeed characterized by a poor abrasion fastness, but it is done on purpose, in order to meet a market demand.

So, no Marla, woad can’t be made responsible for a poorer fastness of indigo on wool. Assuming of course that it was applied by a proper dyeing process and not by a painting process (indigo pigment dispersed in a binder).

Best regards.

By the way, this salon on flat-woven rugs is fantastic and the illustrations amazing !!! Your explanations, Marla, about structures (amazing how many there are!) are so clear that even I may understand them all, eventually. Well... I am boasting. My lone synapse just tells me not to hold my breath meanwhile.

Pierre Galafassi

Hi Richard,

The most likely explanation is that the purple-turning-to-brown shade has been made with a mix of two (or three) synthetic dyes of which one (a red) has a very poor lightfastness and the other (a brownish-yellow for example) has a pretty good one. I suspect that both are so-called «acid» dyes, probably older ones, which are not anymore supposed to be used to dye wool. Or older so-called direct dyes for cotton. The red could also be an even older "aniline" dye, which should not have broken out of the museum.

The magenta turning to pale grey-white shade is probably made with the same lousy dye.

Some very old dyes are still manufactured in Asia and misused for the strangest purposes, as for example this brilliant industrial baker who used optical brighteners («whiteners») to make white bread.
Best regards
Pierre