Is "Kennel Blindness" in Rugs a Danger?
Dear folks –
My wife was, some time back now, a serious breeder and exhibitor of collie dogs.
Dog exhibitors, like rug collectors, are interested in beauty.
Now, this is the case for the dog breeder with some distinctions. Unlike rugs,
there are written and blessed standards for all accepted AKC breeds (other countries
have their own varieties of such standards). The written standard says (authoritatively)
what a given breed of dog should look like. Both virtues and faults are indicated
and some of the latter are disqualifying in the ring.
But, as is the case with rugs, such standards are socially constructed and periodically
modified and, of course, have to be visualized and applied by dog show judges
in the ring. So while there is a distinction between recognizing how closely
a given dog meets its breed standard and claiming that a given rug is beautiful,
something rather similar is going on.
Now I make this comparison as a prelude to asking something controversial. In
fact, my question is askew of, if not actually opposed to, the basic position
I take whenever issues of rug aesthetics arise. That is that rug aesthetics
have no agreed objective basis. Moreover, anyone who puts up Victorian face
shields for discussion should likely be embarrassed ever after about raising
any aesthetic consideration at all. But following Emerson and his indication
about “a foolish consistency” and “little minds” (most people don’t notice his
adjective) I want to press a particular aspect of the aesthetic world of recognizing
a beautiful collie to see if we are ever in danger of something similar in the
world of rugs.
There is a phenomenon in the dog world called “kennel blindness.” It is the
result of the fact that dog breeders and exhibitors (naturally) own some dogs.
The dogs in their own kennel are those they tend to see most frequently. After
awhile, unless there are corrective experiences, “my” dogs begin to look like
“good” dogs because my image of what a collie should be is largely determined
by my everyday exposure to actual collies.
Collie breeders go to dog shows and buy breed books and magazines (full of photos
of champion collies) in part to continually hone (and correct) their picture
of what a “good” collie should look like.
Now come to our world of rugs and collecting. The rugs we see most often are
almost unavoidably the rugs we own. These rugs are often (for a variety of reasons)
not those that most of us would place at the top of the aesthetic standard for
their type. We like things about them (that's why we bought them) but would
have to admit that while they may be "interesting," they are not "great."
Is it possible, likely even, that the rugs we see most often work to move our
picture of what a “good” rug, of the type(s) we collect, should be in the direction
of whatever the rugs we own “are?”
I know a very successful collie breeder and exhibitor who will not have even
a statue of a collie in her home that is not very close to what the standard
says is correct. She says that she needs to feed her eye constantly only on
collie images that are correct.
The “standards” by which particular types of rugs are judged are not very firmly
formulated (there is nothing equivalent to the dog world breed standard) but
is it possible that (even if aesthetic excellence cannot be firmly attached
to objective evidence) that we pass up opportunities to learn and develop if
we spend too much time with the rugs in our “kennel” without taking corrective
measures?
Is there a danger of a rug equivalent to “kennel blindness?”
Regards,
R. John Howe
Hi John,
I understand what you mean, but I think not.
There’s too much diversity - or too many variables - between an “ideal standard”
dog and… What? A particular kind of rug? Caucasian? Nah! Anatolian, Persian?
Nope! Turkoman? Well…
No, we have to limit the field. Let’s say an “ideal standard” Tekke main carpet.
OK – let’s say that I own a decent but far from perfect Tekke main carpet -
assuming that we can define what is a perfect – or ideal standard – Tekke
main carpet.
Would that prevent me from seeing or seeking a better Tekke main carpet?
Again, I don't think so.
After all collectors aren’t usually trading some of their old pieces for the
purpose of acquiring better ones?
Regards,
Filiberto
Hi John
I sometimes see people defend aesthetic criteria that would put one (or more)
of their pieces into higher regard than they might otherwise get, but I think
it's more common to invert this process. That is, we usually learn the mainstream
criteria from others, and make our acquisitions accordingly.
The occasional pioneering collector who ignores mainstream fashion and later
winds up in front of the pack is the exception. My guess is that most would-be
pioneers wind up in the rear. It's kind of like the screwballs who love to point
out that many a creative genius was viewed as a screwball for awhile. That's
true, but almost all of those seen as screwballs aren't creative geniuses, they're
screwballs.
Regards
Steve Price
some rugs are dogs
John:
This isn't quite to your point, but I recall when fumbling around years ago
trying to get up to speed about rugs, I had the idea that the objective was
to get one nice exemplar of all those rugs in the books. A Perepedil with rams'
horns, a Chi-Chi, a hatchli (hatchlou, ensi, etc.), something nice with boteh
all over it, etc. I got over that. It sunk in that a better purpose was to find
pieces within a particular type or rubric, but that were distinguished (for
the better) in one or more ways from the group. That led to trying to understand
what made rugs from a particular class or group more excellent than others.
I would imagine most dedicated seekers and collectors go through something like
the same process. How well we do it, of course, is fuel for the threads in Turkotek,
but most are striving for it.
Another phenomenon I observed through the years that I think has some currency
with your comments is the danger inherent in seeing too much junk and not enough
quality material. Most of my experience chasing rugs was by way of looking into
antique shops, oriental rug shops (e. g., the old family business sort, run
more often than not by people of Armenian descent, or other Middle Eastern provenance)
or general auctions. As anyone who has done this (certain celebrated flea marketeers
come to mind) can attest, one encounters mostly depressing junk. After a while,
a decent Enjalus mat with good wool, solid color, and a half-baked design, with
no glue on the back and no sign of having been washed in frightening chemicals,
would seem like the Ardebil carpet. Professional buyers wouldn't be so distracted,
but for the amateur, it was necessary to see and handle really good material
frequently in order not to be lulled into accumulating a lot of mediocre stuff.
Finally, I agree with Filiberto that the dog analogy limps a bit because the
standard is strictly dictated. The fact that rug standards are all over the
place is evident to anyone who reads these threads. In truth, as far as the
dogs go, if you read that AKC manual, in which all the dogs are pictured and
the standards are listed, you learn that for each breed, the adherents are very
ready to explain that their breed is truly the best. However, I won't get into
that, as we are making enough of a hash of the rug business without seeking
to evoke the ire of the canine establishment.
room for mutts
Hi John- I'm glad you brought this up and hope you get responses from many
of the usual suspects. You know I have only recently stumbled into this world
of rugs, and my lack of refinement allows me to like things that I am apparently
not supposed to. I am still not sure that I want to entirely relenquish this
naivete. A limited budget forces me to accept compromises, and I want to be
able to like them. Some folks may be able to develop their sensitivity for years,
while saving their money in order to buy one great rug, but that kind of discipline
is a mystery to me.
I believe learning more will begin to make me a better "bottom feeder", and
I have already sold a couple pieces that I had been enthusiastic about getting,
but really, I am just a sucker for a rug that makes me smile. Maybe just one
of the colors seems perfect.
My Dad liked mutts. He would have described one of my rugs as follows: "Its
father was Khamseh and its mother was careless..."
best regards- d.k.
Corrective Experiences
Hello John:
You use the term "corrective experiences" to raise the importance of always
looking beyond what you see most often or every day. You suggest that without
such experiences there is a danger of what breeders call "kennel blindness".
I am not certain of the analogy having only had kindly Labradors laying about
the house never caring much for whether they looked good or not, but I am fairly
confident that the idea of corrective experiences is critical to collecting
and has at least several contexts.
First, to be a collector you have to start collecting. Therefore, the position
of Mr. Klingensmith is important. You have to go out and be a bottom feeder
and take a chance on some pieces and learn from them even if those purchases
turn out to be desultory. Second, if you only hang out with the rugs so purchased
or with other bottom feeders or with rug dealers of the type referenced by Mr.
Larkin, I believe you will remain where you started. The corrective experience
involves going to major exhibitions and top dealers with enough humility to
judge what you have against what you can see as well as having the willingness
to dump or cull what does not stand up - this will give new meaning to the old
dealer truism that if you want to really know what a rug is worth, you just
have to sell it and anyone who has never sold a rug has no idea what a rug is
worth.
My own corrective experiences are telling - In 1990, as a young, aggressive
bottom feeder I went to the ICOC in San Francisco and saw the exhibitions and
dealer offerings there. I still remember meeting Ralph and Linda Kaffel and
seeing their pieces exhibited at Fort Mason along with those of other many other
collectors such as Michael Rothburg. Comparing what I had been seeing and acquiring
afforded me the first opportunity to start over. The interesting thing was in
speaking with Ralph and Linda and Michael Rothburg and other long standing and
serious collectors and admitting to them in conversation that I had concluded
that I needed to start over, this admission was not seen as a bad thing but
rather elevated me in their eyes because they all told me they had had similar
experiences and that it was a necessary step.
Thereafter acquisitions slowed and became more calulated. Even then, it was
another three years and I decided to start over again after additional corrective
experiences and become truly focused on Kurdish weavings essentially because
of one rug that made everything I had seem, well, meaningless.
I think there are many roads to travel in collecting rugs but the corrective
experiences, if you have the humility and guts to accept them, are among the
most rewarding if you aim is to collect rugs as rugs rather than as memories
of a trip or experience or merely as decoration. Rug collecting is not stamp
collecting, it cannot be learned merely from a book or a dealer nor can a collection
be built on textbook examples. And this really leads to the aesthetic standards
you talk about. I think there are some aesthetic standards in rug collecting,
though not necessarily "ideal standards" and I think they are largely set by
the people who have gone through the corrective experiences, learned from them
and continued to learn, hone and collect. And this is fluid as more and more
is learned, "seen" and digested - I do not think this fluidity is unique to
rugs or rug collecting either. It is the pieces of these collectors that are
requested when it comes time to hang an exhibition and seeing all those pieces
hung side by side gives the lenders as well as everyone else the chance to have
yet another corrective experience.
I hope this adds something to the chatter, michael
Kurdish rug
Michael:
1. Is it possible for us to see the Kurdish rug that made all prior rugs meaningless?
2. Do you continue to have the same high opinion of the rug?
3. Are you moved by good but not spectacular Kurdish weavings, say Jaff Kurd
bags, things of that sort?
__________________
Rich Larkin
Hi all,
I tend to agree with Michael that over time most collectors do become more discerning
in their acquisitions, and that this process is most effective if one is open-minded
and willing and able to admit mistakes. Having said that, my own view is that
there lies some danger in spending too much time and putting too much emphasis
on the opinions of others, however expert. I say this for two reasons. First,
it can quickly result in acquisition that veers away from one's own tastes in
order to have a "respectable" collection, based largely on what one sees in
published collections. Second, I think that this approach can lead directly
to the circular process of having collectors conform to a certain perspective
on what is "good" and what is "bad". Even if the collective wisdom is usually
right, it does close down new and fresh thinking rather too quickly.
In my own experience, I certainly have a few pieces from the "early days" that
in retrospect were "learners" and don't inspire me today. However, I also made
a few "inspired" choices early on before I had enough knowledge to even identify
the major weaving group. Conversely, now that I have become a bit more educated,
I find myself looking at pieces with a more "traditional" view of what is good
and what is bad. I have purchased a few pieces on that basis, which I now regret
because they don't appeal to me as much on a personal basis.
So unless one is trying to develop a "world-class" collection, or buys rugs
for investment, my advice would be to continue to look at a wide variety of
pieces so that you know what is out there, and purchase the ones that you really
like. If you are like me, you'll get some "clunkers", but at least they'll be
clunkers that you like, rather than clunkers that many others will like.
James.
Rich -
Michael Wendorf will answer your questions for himself, but you can see a number
of his rugs in the Turkotek archives.
He gave a presentation on Kurdish rugs at ACOR in Indianapolis a few years ago
and agreed to do a salon version of it here.
Here's the link:
http://turkotek.com/salon_00088/salon.html
Regards,
R. John Howe
Thank you, John.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Tastes in buying rugs
Hello All:
Reading this discussion motivated me to make this post and I must state I am
no rug expert but I have followed the market for old rugs for a number of years
and do have a small collection.
Tastes in buying rugs are individual and I believe we would all agree on this
point. However, tastes in judging rugs on a collective basis surely are not.
Over the years it seems to me a quite substantial body of information has been
documented and any collector who is experienced would have had to have been
observant of this factor in making any buying decision.
Naturally, the more expert the collector is, the more awareness of this body
of information would enter into that buying decision.
Clearly then, at least from this writer's perspective, buyers with less than
a good knowledge of this body of information would not be able to judge their
possible purchases as well as someone who is more knowledgeable.
This, more than any other comments posted here, appears to me to be the crux
of this matter. Often, there is no mystery for those in the know concerning
the attributes of a particular rug and while there are not many of us in the
know we all should strive to be in such a position.
Isn't that the answer here?
There's another one of Michael's Jaf bags that he kindly loaned for the exhibition
I put together for that same ACOR. The standard I was trying to reach was "rare
and beautiful". His bag differs from the traditional Jafs we're used to seeing
in that it is at the same time both familiar and monumentally unique.
If there's a cure for "kennel blindness" (why isn't it called "kennel vision"?),
this piece is surely one way to do it.
Cordially,
-Jerry-
I'll leave the lights on
Hello Rich:
1. Yes, but you have to come here to do so. It is a rug with a curvilinear,
floral design and spectacular colors of the group known as Sauj Bulagh. Not
exactly a barbaric and bombastic tribal piece. In fact, when word got out that
I had purchased this piece, some well known peer collectors and dealers laughed
at me for buying it at the price I did. Shortly thereafter, Sauj Bulagh pieces
became better known and appreciated as a group and the people who had laughed
stopped. Today the place of this group of carpets is highly appreciated as a
bridge to the Safavid era. A reminder to always use your eyes. Let me know when
you are coming and I'll leave the lights on.
2. Yes, it occupies a wall in my home and reminds me why I started collecting
Kurdish rugs in 1993. When lit and seen vertically it remains the most painterly
rug I have ever found outside the classical era. However, as my appreciation
and understanding of Kurdish rugs has deepened or grown over the years I have
found other rugs, completely different Kurdish rugs, that I appreciate just
as much. Some of these rugs are in my collection, some are not. I feel no need
to try and own them all, I just like to know them.
3. It depends. I have always liked Jaf bags but at this point it takes a lot
to motivate me to want to own more. Of course, any piece that is spectacular
- no matter the type - is the kind of piece you want to try and own. I am not
sure what you mean by good. Merely good, sort of good, good to you, good price?
My brusque cynicism is repeatedly overwhelmed by the incredible creativity,
diversity and sense of color that can be found within the Kurdish weaving tradition.
This has motivated me to continue looking and thinking about Kurdish weavings
since 1993 and it has never disappointed even as my understanding and composite
experience has evolved.
I appreciate John providing the link he did. Many but not all of the rugs I
used in Indianapolis belong to me. The point of that program was to argue the
basis of a very long Kurdish weaving tradition, not to show a collection. You
might also be interested in an exhibition for the Near Eastern Art Research
Center. The link to photos from that 1999 exhibition is www.orientalcarpets.net/Exhibition_of_kurd_rugs.htm
In response to James, I do not think of rugs as mistakes or successes, I think
of rugs as each having a story and a lesson to tell - much like other collectors.
Ultimately you have to listen to both and then forge your own conclusions. Today,
it is fairly easy to come up to a basic level of discernment with so many books
and exhibitions; but discernment - whatever that is - is and always has been
the real test. Collectors just one generation ago did it largely in isolation
or with only a small peer group. Today the means seem more readily available,
yet what is the result? Great rugs are out there, but who is seeking to understand
and appreciate them?
Best of luck, Michael
Hi Michael,
First let me say that based on the pictures of rugs that I have perused in your
exhibitions, I would say that whether I have any discernment or not, I love
most of those pieces and would consider myself very lucky to own a couple or
more.
I can't speak for others, but I do know that I have made some mistakes with
rug buying, and have been fortunate with others. But this is mostly in relation
to the price I paid, rather than the overall buying and owning experience. I
have learned from each, and all of them have found some role in our home.
In any case, I agree with your initial assertion that one is well-advised to
keep an open mind and seek out the opinion of others throughout the collecting
process. It has helped me to better assess my own taste and appreciate some
of the nuances that would have otherwise slipped my attention. In that regard,
I think that Turkotek has been a useful learning ground for me. However, I think
it is instructive to also mention that I have found it not uncommon for collectors
who are more experienced than I to differ substantially in their assessment
of a rug, so I have found it important to not be overly influenced by the opinions
of others.
Cheers,
James.
Michael:
Thanks for the reply and the link. I love virtually all the pieces in the link
John provided to your ACOR presentation. Three that are particularly wonderful,
and which possess great helpings of the magic in the best Kurdish rugs, are
the one you described as "Proto-Kurdish," the ivory field one with the repeating
device, and the one you linked to the McMullan garden carpet at the Fogg. I
haven't had the chance to read the presentation fully as yet but will do so
with great interest.
I fully agree with your assessment of the excellence of the Kurdish weaving
tradition. The best of them have an exotic character that beats the Caucasian
rugs hands down, in my opinion. You stated it succinctly and perfectly yourself,
"...the incredible creativity, diversity and sense of color that can be found
within the Kurdish weaving tradition." Moreover, these qualities can often be
found in the simplest and most humble items, such as the Jaf Kurd bags. I have
never been troubled by the apparent relative disregard given to Kurdish weaving
in general by the community of Middle Eastern weaving afficionados. For persons
who have to acquire their rugs within limited means, general disregard of the
favored and sought after pieces can be a blessing.
The rubric, Sauj Bulagh, is one I have never understood very well in the context
of rugs. I realize it is a town or village in Kurdistan, and I have read many
general descriptions (not especially consistent) of the rugs supposedly produced
there, but I do not recognize any particular rug type to be "Sauj Bulagh," as
I do regarding, say, Bijar. Can you point me to sources where the type is well
described or illustrated?
__________________
Rich Larkin
Hi Sayed,
I find your comments interesting. You said,
"Tastes in buying rugs are individual and I believe we would all agree on this
point. However, tastes in judging rugs on a collective basis surely are not."
I'm not sure I understand the distinction there. I want to, as you point out
that it is at the crux of the matter. It may be in the significance of the word,
"collective." Do you mean that it is possible to define collective tastes by
surveying the literature, market reports, etc.? Is your point that success in
buying is to be equated with buying what the collective community of rug critics
would judge to be good? Can you elaborate?
__________________
Rich Larkin
The rubric of Sauj Bulagh
My pleasure Rich.
Sauj Bulagh is modern Mahabad and it is a term of convenience for a group or
groups of rugs that may have been woven in the general area until perhaps around
1900. Interestingly, travellers all agree that you will not find any examples
in or around Mahabad recently and no one can remember these rugs ever being
there. Years ago, many of the rugs we attribute to Sauj Bulagh would have been
attributed to Mosul. In fact, the rug that I mentioned that started this Kurdish
journey for me has an old label with the words "Mosul, Persian" sewn onto the
back. Since Mosul became part of Iraq in the 1920s, I have always surmised that
the label itself probably pre-dates the creation of Iraq.
There really should not be any confusion about the type of rug we are referring
to when we call something Sauj Bulagh. The tendency to label this group of rugs
as Sauj Bulagh as opposed to Mosul or something else seems to have its origins
with a single carpet illustrated by A. U. Pope in 1917. The carpet published
in Pope's "Catalogue of the Mrs. Phoebe A. Hearst Loan Collection" San Francisco
1917 pp 101 - 02 is described as having "deep resonant tones" and a "gamut of
deep blues, purple, , glowing muffled red and soft yellow that was never surpassed
as sheer colour at any time." Consistent with this description of color a relatively
rare group of carpets began to emerge, but with little written about them until
1993 when Alberto Levi publihed an article in Issue 70 of Hali and documented
several examples that fit the color description and also with consistent structural
details. As it happened, a number of others including James Burns of Seattle,
Brian Morehouse in Los Angeles, Michael Rothberg in San Francisco and myself
were all aware of and looking for examples at the same time Levi was working
on his article. Indeed an example from The Burns collection had created a certain
buzz when it graced the cover of Hali Issue 62 in April 1992. It remains in
the Burns collection and is plate 49 in his book Antique Rugs of Kurdistan.
This particular rug is also distinctive because although it is otherwise structurally
and color consistent with the group, it has a design consisting of ashik devices.
Examples with more tribal and non-floral designs are much rarer than those in
the more persianate, floral designs. My collection has only two such examples
and the ashik device and its varients is one type and the so-called shikak device
another.
These structural details are as follows. 2 ply ivory or ivory and tan wool warps;
2 red dyed wool wefts between each row of symmetrically knotted wool pile; a
corrosive brown field that often creates an etched or embossed effect with the
field design. The backs are flat. Long staple and very glossy wool with heavy,
floppy handles. The best of these rugs have as many as 15 deeply saturated colors
and designs that are typically floral and curvilinear.
In regard to design, Mr. Levi argued that these rugs must be a "definite iconographical
link to the Safavid period workshops." He then called these relatively early
rugs "proto-Kurdish." I have been very critical of this proto-Kurdish label
which quickly became adopted by the trade. Although Mr. Levi is correct that
some examples appear to be relatively early, I have argued that the Kurdish
weaving tradition extends far beyond the Safavid era and that the term proto-Kurdish
mischaracterizes this tradition and those many other types of Kurdish rugs which
may well have design or iconographical as well as structural origins that pre-date
the Sauj Bulagh rugs by thousands of years. I suggest that anyone interested
in these rugs read Mr. Levi's article in Hali 70.
At the same time, check out Hali 62 with the Burns rug on the cover, in so doing
refer also to page 61. There a carpet from my collection is pictured that William
Eagleton chose to illustrate as an example of a classic East Anatolian Kurdish
rug with hexagons woven four rows across and seven down. The colors on this
rug are equal to most Sauj Bulagh rugs and demonstrates the fact that the availability
of great dyes was not limited to Sauj Bulagh.
One more thing, you mention Bijar. I do not consider the rugs of Bijar, Sennah
or Kolyai (Hammadans) to be traditional Kurdish rugs even though they may have
often been woven by Kurds. The reason is that the structure of each type is
not consistent with what I consider to be Kurdish.
Best wishes, michael
Michael:
Thank you. A most interesting commentary. My issues of HALI are stored in my
attic and I have not yet dredged up Nos. 62 and 70. I am eager to see the rugs
Levi described as "Sauj Bulagh."
In fact, a number of writers were referring to a rug type of that name before
WW I (various spellings, of course). Both Hawley and Lewis did so. I haven't
been able put my hand on Mumford to see what he had to say about it. My sense
in reading these books is that the writers were applying the label to a specific
type of rug known to them, not necessarily the same type for each writer. The
same could be said for the "Mosul" rug. "Sauj Bulagh" seemed to be a name for
a vague type of Kurdish rug of a somewhat refined type, and "Mosul" the name
for a coarser variety of Kurdish rug. I am quite sure that both terms have historically
been widely used over the years in the rug trade without great consistency.
You have a very disciplined standard reserved for the traditional Kurdish rug.
It seems odd that you would eliminate from the Kurdish tradition various groups
of rugs, probably woven by Kurds, on the basis of structure. How likely is it
that dispersed people would continue consistent or homogeneous structural weaving
habits over many generations? Why would structure in particular be the benchmark
by which you would consider a group of weaving in or out of the tradition?
I understand more easily why you might want to disregard some of the groups
you mentioned based on color and design, or on textile fabric considerations.
It is probably true that the great majority of Bijar, Senneh, and many Hamadan
area village rugs (thought to have been woven by Kurds) from the last century
or so cannot be said to reflect the true Kurdish weaving tradition. However,
in my opinion, many older Bijars are quite up to the standard. I will leave
Senneh out, as they are a type unto themselves, and I am not much taken with
most of them. I do find some "Kurdish village rugs" (as I call them), which
I assume to be from the greater Hamadan area of production, to have much merit
in the Kurdish way. Many of them may be coarse or unsophisticated (I might say
"crude," although the term has taken on some baggage of late), but they can
also have great vigor, excellent color and materials, imaginative use of color,
and attractive texture or handling characteristics. All of these things I consider
hallmarks of good Kurdish weaving.
No doubt, my laissez faire attitude in this regard comes from too much association
with sub par material. It was a fortunate turn of events in my case, as I was
satisfied to purchase things within my financial range. Anyway, I look forward
to reading the text of your ACOR exhibition article, as well as the HALI pieces.
Best regards.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Michael:
Having just read the article that accompanied your ACOR exhibition (8,000 year
old weaving tradition), I understand better the basis of your inclusion and
exclusion within this tradition. It is a fascinating argument, and if the tentative
conclusions you draw (regarding the important place of the Kurds in the history
of weaving and pile weaving), I am not surprised. I have always thought they
were the uncrowned weaving champs of the rug world, even as I admitted some
"commercial" pieces to the judging.
I have only started to look at the discussion threads, which I will relish.
Incidentally, I now have something to say about a small piece I own showing
the "shikak" device. I never knew what to say about it, except that it was vaguely
from Turkey. It has a cochineal-like red and some other colors that may not
stand too much scrutiny (and yet, they might!), but the drawing and overall
effect are pleasing.
Kudos on your work in this area.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Hello All:
Mr. Larkin asked me to explain further my comments and I am glad to do that
now.
I have posted the relevant part of his post here(hope this was done correctly)
and added in () numbers to mark the points he questioned:
quote:
[i]I'm not sure I understand the distinction there. I want to, as you point out that it is at the crux of the matter. It may be in the significance of the word, "collective." (1) Do you mean that it is possible to define collective tastes by surveying the literature, market reports, etc.? (2)Is your point that success in buying is to be equated with buying what the collective community of rug critics would judge to be good? Can you elaborate? (/i)
Hi
I'm reasonably sure "Unegistered" is Michael Wendorf, who (uncharacteristically)
forgot to overwrite Unregistered with his name when he posted. Michael, if this
is your post, please let me know and I'l linsert your name in it. If it isn't
Michael, will the author please send me his/her name?
Thanks
Steve Price
Sayed Mustaffa
Hi Steve:
I cannot accept credit for the previous post and the many good points made,
I would think Mr. Mustaffa (?) is your guest.
Rich, I would be delighted to learn of any old references to Sauj Bulagh rugs.
You also asked above how likely it would be that dispersed people would continue
consistent or homogeneous structural weaving habits over many generations. It
probably depends on the tradition and people but I would think it possible even
among dispersed people although I am not exactly what you mean by this. The
weftless soumak is an interesting structure in this question. The structure
pre-dates the invention of the modern loom. Assuming for the moment that weftless
soumak represents a continuous tradition among Kurdish weavers, why would the
weavers continue to use this structure long after the need to do so had ended?
One explanation could be that it saves time. However, in looking at these pieces
and the quality of their construction in the better examples, this explanation
seems to be less than satisfactory. A simple explanation could be that Kurdish
weavers continued to weave in this structure because that is the way they had
always done it - it represents part of their tradition and identity.
Best, Michael
Dear folks -
The conversation has moved a little and some may have the copies of Hali that
Michael Wendorf has cited above, but if not, here are most if not all of the
rugs labeled "Sauj Bulagh" in these two articles and one cover shot that is
not.
First, here is the rug and the cover detail from Hali, Issue 62.
The above piece is 4'1" X 7' and is said to exhibit 15 colors. It is one of
the Sauj Bulagh variety.
Here is the closer detail on the cover.
And here are the images from Hali, Issue 70.
These begin with a relatively subdued and simplified version of older Persian
"garden" field layouts. This is not a "Sauj Bulagh" variety. It is 6' X 9'1".
The piece below is a Sauj Bulagh rug. It is 4'10" x 6'6" and estimated to have
been woven about 1800.
The piece below is another labeled Sauj Bulagh.
It is 6'2" X 12'1". Again about 1800.
A further Sauj Bulagh rug is the one below.
It is 5'6" X 9' and also seen to have been woven about 1800.
These images may help to make Michael's references and comments more concrete.
The last three images are labeled by Alberto Levi "Proto-Kurdish." As Michael
has said, he objects to this terminology. Michael thinks his Kurds have been
weaving forever. Well, at least for maybe 8,000 years.
Regards,
R. John Howe
images and a sub-group
Thanks for posting those images John. The dates assigned have always seemed
very aggressive to me with the exception of the 5'6 x 9 shrub carpet which certainly
seems very old. Can you also post the image of my hexagon rug from Issue 62,
page 61?
The first non-cover rug illustrated above with the corroded brown ground, now
in the Rothberg collection, is the type most consistent the Sauj Bulagh characteristics.
The ivory ground rugs are beautiful and represent a small sub-group that have
been called Sauj Bulagh because of the connection in design to the corrosive
brown ground ground and the link to Safavid persianate designs. While they do
share some characteristics such as two red dyed wool wefts between each row
of knotted pile, there are also some significant differences the most obvious
of which is ground color. These pieces tend to be a little thinner in handle
and be more finely knotted than most rugs in the corrosive brown ground group.
Some examples have cotton warps rather than the wool typical of the brown ground
group. Cotton warps are found in some other groups of Kurdish workshop carpets
such as so-called garden carpets not generally associated with Sauj Bulagh.
In addition, the white ground group typically includes a distinctive apricot
color that is not commonly found in the corrosive brown group. Another exceptional
example of the ivory ground group is in Burns' book as plate 40.
This is getting unusally focused so I will stop unless others are actually interested
in any of this. Best, Michael
John, Michael, et al,
John, as usual, you are right there. Thanks. I can believe the posts from HALI
70 are the sorts of rugs the earlier writers had in mind when using the term,
usually with considerable respect, “Sauj Bulagh.”
Michael, I find your argument about weftless soumak and the apparent persistence
of it over many thousands of years among certain Kurdish weavers of Kurdistan
quite compelling. Nevertheless, it is astonishing if those weavers have continued
the practice all that time because “…that is the way they have always done it.”
I don’t dismiss the possibility, find it exciting (as a fan of Kurdish weaving),
and congratulate you for having proposed the idea. And yet, I would not hold
against other Kurds the fact that somewhere during those millennia they found
it necessary or convenient to alter their weaving methods and styles. (When
I spoke of dispersed peoples, I was referring to segments of the Kurdish population
that have moved or relocated to areas outside Kurdistan proper. I mostly assume
this to be historically true, but don't have much specific knowledge about it.)
I don’t suggest you should slacken your standards to bring in a lot of other
Kurds I happen to think weave attractive goods. Your studies are proceeding
on an exacting line that probably sets its own standards.
Regarding mention of Sauj Bulagh in older writings. I have a few of the older
books, some of which mention Sauj Bulagh. If you like, I will be happy to copy
the pages that make these mentions and send them to you, along with “front-of-book”
information sufficient to allow you to identify the book. If you wish to click
on my profile link, I think my e-mail address is there. You could supply an
address in that way.
I never put too much weight on those old books. However, I often had the sense
that the authors were referring to specific types of rugs with which they were
familiar, and I would study the books in order to try to glean some of that
information. Before one could separate the wheat from the chaff, one had to
get hold of the mixture.
Let me know if you have any interest in these references. Incidentally, I doubt
you will find much illumination in them. I always found them a bit too vague
to be of much use. As I mentioned earlier, I have found over the years the terms
“Sauj Bulagh” and “Mosul” to have been loosely and inconsistently used in the
trade, especially the latter term.
__________________
Rich Larkin
I'm interested.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Dear folks -
Here is the additional picture that Michael Wendorf requested above.
The size is not given, but Michael may wish to speak to it further.
Regards,
R. John Howe
Sayed:
“Buying great old rugs is all about knowledge and desire, not about anything
else.”
That’s a hefty statement that I don’t think can be sustained, but it doesn’t
have to be for the validity of the rest of your comments. It is true that anyone
venturing into the antique rug market with any seriousness should have a pretty
good grasp of the more sophisticated general collective wisdom about the rugs.
To act otherwise would be at one’s peril. Of course, all things are relative
in this regard, and it depends on how seriously one is getting in.
I don’t have the level of confidence in the collective wisdom of the rug marketplace
that you seem to have. I have always believed that the market for rugs is very
much tied to fashions that are not necessarily justified by the merits of what
is in fashion at a particular time. Perhaps you understate the kinks in the
market by referring merely to passing attitudes about Kula or Ghiordes prayer
rugs. I think the market has sagged or will sag on many other rugs that have
had their day in the sun. Occasionally, scholarly work emerges that changes
the views of a group of rugs, and one must watch out for the fallout.
I have always thought that a great deal of the perceptible effort on the part
of rug “commentators” to promote the superior merits of a particular rug type
was driven by the purpose of making that type a star in the marketplace. Furthermore,
when certain rug types become “in vogue” based on exhibitions, scholarly work,
or some other promotion, one can expect a small flood of those pieces in the
market, with the initial examples commanding big prices. Surely there must be
a reasonable number of collectors out there who vote their convictions when
buying rugs. If their tastes run to rugs out of vogue, they ought to be able
to buy reasonably. The fact that their preferred rugs are not in vogue, however,
says nothing, per se, about the merit of the rugs, in my opinion.
Turning to your comment I quoted above, I humbly suggest that buying great old
rugs is very much about money most of the time. Having money won’t necessarily
help you select great old rugs, and, rarely, great old rugs are obtained for
peanuts; but by and large, if you don’t have a very healthy supply of money,
you are not going to amass a large number of great old rugs. Fortunately, you
can acquire some nice charming old rugs by combining patience and a modest outlay
with knowledge and desire. What do you think of that?
__________________
Rich Larkin
Dear folks -
I agree with Rich in his most recent comment.
Knowledge and desire certainly play their important parts in assembling a quality
collection.
Certainly readily disposable funds plays their role.
So does luck. I was offered a nice piece once because the buyer wanted it not
to fall into another potential purchaser's hands.
It is true as a famous saying goes that "chance favors a prepared mind," but
there's lots of pretty pure luck out there too.
Regards,
R. John Howe
John, Sayed, et al:
When I lived in Riyadh in the sixties, I knew a couple who had a Turkoman "khalyk,"
probably Tekke in my mind's eye, and probably good and old (I'd love to see
it again today). They knew nothing about rugs and cared little more. They acquired
the Khalyk the morning they left an apartment complex in Dallas to begin their
migration to Saudi Arabia. It was sitting on top of the trash barrels waiting
to be picked up as they waited for their taxi to get to the airport. Mrs thought
it looked interesting and stuffed it in her handbag.
So there is some luck involved!
__________________
Rich Larkin
Interesting story, Rich.
Maybe it would be interesting, or at least amusing, to start a thread exhibiting
pieces that came into the possession of Turkotekkers through "luck", which could
result either from "a prepared mind" or just plain ignorance that later proved
to be "dumb luck".
James.
James -
We indulged in a species of the acquisition by luck phenomenon in the salon
on Joe Fell's rug morning at the TM a few years ago.
Since it's a little hard to find, I'll just quote it with the image below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Fell next put up this Yomut engsi.
He said that this rug came to him in a remarkable way. A person on welfare,
who picked over things people had thrown out, found this rug in a trash pile
and took it to his social worker whom he knew collected rugs. The rug is in
remarkable condition and the social worker offered to buy it. The person on
welfare was reluctant to accept any cash, since this might disqualify him from
receiving welfare, but said to the social worker that there was a chenille mat
in a local store that he wanted and that he would be willing to trade this engsi
for it. The social worker purchased the mat and made the trade and brought the
piece to Fell. Joe said that finding antique rugs in trash was a fairly frequent
thing during his early days as a dealer, and Harold Keshishian offered from
the audience that there was supposedly a collection of rugs once in NYC, composed
entirely of pieces that had been rescued from the trash pile. Joe responded
that they were likely pretty old rugs since these seemed often to be what were
thrown out. Wendel Swan said that he was once visiting a dealer to barter about
a Turkmen engsi and noticed that there was an antique fragment, at the back,
apparently to be thrown out in the trash that seemed to him potentially more
valuable than the engsi. He said that he would pay the dealer's price for the
engsi if the dealer would throw in the piece from the trash pile. The dealer
said, "Sure, it's going to be thrown out in the morning, anyway." Fell cautioned
that the days when antique pieces are found in the trash seem over now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way, the last Kurdish piece shown above was commented on in Hali by William
Eagleton, the Kurdish expert, who said that it had been desribed as "Yurok,"
a term he felt applied to folks with a Turkmen background in western Turkey.
He said this rug was Kurdish and likely from eastern Turkey, where there are
lots of Kurds.
I mention that because Eagleton was also in audience at the Joe Fell rug morning
and made a similar suggestion about another rug that Joe had been told was also
Yurok. Here, below, is that quoted passage with images.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next piece was another longish one with a colorful Memling gul design.
Joe pointed out that Memling guls are documented in the "painter" rugs as far
back as the 15th century.
He said that he thought that this rug was woven in the early 19th century or
even perhaps in the 18th century in eastern Anatolia. He described it as likely
Yurok. Thomas Eagleton, the Kurdish expert,was in the audience. He spoke up
to say that he thought it was likely to be Kurdish. Here is one more detail
of this colorful piece.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regards,
R. John Howe
Luck or Desire?
Hello All:
Yes, I was the author of the unregistered post. Sorry for any confusion.
Concerning the comments my post has elicited I would just like to state that
having a lot of money to spend on rugs is no guarantee one will end up with
good or great ones.
When buying at Sothebys or other auction houses, or from rug dealers, then I
would agree one needs lots of money. However, there are many great rugs I know
of that have been bought for pennies in comparison. That is why I mentioned
the word desire.
Maybe I should have also included having enough time. Time to comb through many
other avenues likely to produce the opportunity to find great examples.
No, no one will not probably form a collection looking in trash barrels or garbage
dumps. Finding something there will only be like lightning striking twice in
the same place.
But there are places where far more regularly the chance for a good rug to appear
will be much more likely.
There is another quotient necessary to find great rugs and that is knowledge.
So no matter how rich or active a collector is, without good knowledge the possibilities
of finding wonderful rugs will be limited. Very limited in my view.
Some of the best collection of our time have been assembled by just the type
of collector I have described. One who has knowledge and enough time and desire
to get to the right place at the right time.
Remember, if one isn’t there, one cannot buy. And getting there requires time
and desire. And maybe bus fare or that subway token!
A Prepared Mind
Hello all:
I think Mr. Mustaffa is right, no one is going to build a collection just on
luck and serendipity - or just with money, though that and the willingness to
commit some of it is necessary too. Knowledge and judgment based on experience
- including corrective experiences - is fundamental. One also needs to decide
what type of collection, if any, they wish to build. I know people who know
and appreciate a lot about carpets who own few of them and others who seem to
know and appreciate little about them who own many. For me personally, I decided
that I wanted to have a focused collection. For this, I have found that working
with knowledgeable dealers has been not only necessary, but enjoyable and rewarding.
Too often I hear people argue one should not work with dealers, I would say
only one should not become too enamoured or dependent on any one dealer. And
building a focused collection can be a creative process in and of itself.
Of course, Memling gul rugs like Joe Fell's are documented back to the 15th
century, they derive their popular name from Hans Memling who painted such carpets
of stepped polygons with hooks in many of his Madonna paintings, usually draped
over thrones. Many of these rugs are Moghan and Kazak/Caucasian in origin, Joe's
example is considered Kurdish and east Anatolian based on color and structure.
The use of stepped polygons is not unique to any group of weavers or area, it
is a fundamental design element almost everywhere.
The rug with the hexagons seen above also demonstrates, as Fell's Memling rug,
how Kurdish weavers can take a very simple form and make it their own with the
use of color. This rug is a squarish 4' 10" x 5' 8" and utilizes offset knots
to create the diagonals, a technique also common to Jaf bags.
Rich, I do not exclude Bijar, Sennahs or Kolyai rugs as traditional Kurdish
rugs because I do not admire some of them. Anyone who saw the Bijar exhibition
at Seattle ACOR knows that is not so. I do it part to annoy my friend John Collins
and more importantly because no one really knows which of these rugs was woven
by Kurds and which not and because even those that were woven by Kurds were
woven in a structure that is not traditional to Kurdish weavers and represents
a weave and style that is not really indigenous to them.
Yes, I am interested in all references to these rug, illuminating or not.
Thanks, do carry on.
Michael
sources
Sayed:
I realized, of course, that your statement (quoted by me) was offered as a bit
of hyperbole in order to emphasize the point that the essential requirements
for effective collecting were knowledge and desire. I agree with you, and even
concede that having a ton of money in the equation can be a hindrance to a great
collection. If money is no object, perhaps it is too easy to simply buy whatever
comes along to tickle the fancy. (Not having been so afflicted, I wouldn't know
for sure.)
As Michael says, one needs to decide what kind of collection, if any, is being
sought. I will broaden that statement to say that there are many ways to exercise
the hobby, and for the individual, it is a question of what gives satisfaction.
In my own case, it was hunting around in different places hoping to turn up
something I liked. (Trash barrels were not generally a favored Venue. Once,
while escorting the Cub Scouts on a field trip through the local transfer station,
I reached down and snatched up a 3' x 5' Chinese mat, ca. 1910, from the giant
sized dumpster. I estimated a market value, considering condition, at about
$35.00.)
That method tended to limit the prospects for first class finds, but it works
if one can be easily pleased. An example of the sort of thing that I found is
a small Baluch style (with Afshar influence?) bagface I posted in the thread
Gene Williams started with his black field prayer rug. It is a modest piece,
but it exhibits many qualities that collectors of tribal or rustic weavings
tend to prize. I am as happy with it now as I was when I found it, and I am
confident in my judgment of the merits it has, such as they are. The standing
it might or might not achieve in the marketplace doesn't concern me very much.
It was a case of me thinking I had the knowledge, and buying. Not to say I really
had it, and the results in my particular case are moot for these purposes, but
I would imagine many enthusiasts operate in this fashion. The fact that the
marketplace is not ratifying their judgments isn't necessarily the last word.
Of course, as noted, one must take account of the marketplace attitudes if there
is real money involved, or if one is purchasing with the notion of resale in
the foreseeable future.
We are being reminded just now in these threads (by Michael Wendorf) that there
are still conspicuous bodies of extant weavings that may not have received their
proper due over the years from the collective cognoscenti out there. I'm with
him all the way, and probably quite a bit more lenient in judging specific pieces
than he would be. I predict that if his view of the Kurds as the living throwbacks
to the progenitors of pile weaving takes hold, your Jaff Kurd bagfaces will
fare well in the process (even with Michael shouting cautionary advice from
the grandstand). On the other hand, other classes of rugs, formerly on top of
the pile, may be suffering of late from other scholarly efforts. I won't mention
names. That's the marketplace.
What I did want to ask you, without intending to pry or spoil your secret sources,
was what places you looked to as "...places where far more regularly the chance
for a good rug to appear will be far more likely."
It's a pleasure to trade these views and observations with you. Regards.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Michael:
I take your point about Bijar, etc., rugs. And my advising you on what structural
features to consider in the analysis is like the baseball fans calling the radio
talk shows to advise what Manny Ramirez should be doing to hit more effectively.
Nevertheless, it seems to me that one should be able to acknowledge the artistic
spirit of the Kurdish weaving tradition in some places without the need for
first vetting on structural grounds. I try to avoid the term "artistic" as often
as possible, but can't come up with a better one just now. (No need to respond.)
Incidentally, can you explain the term "Kolyai," or point me to a source of
information?
Regarding references to "Sauj Bulagh" in older books, I think I said my e-mail
address was in my TurkoTek profile. I may have been mistaken. Perhaps Steve
Price can assist you in getting a private message to me. I'd be happy to copy
what references I have and send them to any address you can provide.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Rich -
Michael may add some things, but Barry O'Connell has collected quite a bit of
information on the Kolyai varieties.
http://www.persiancarpetguide.com/sw-asia/Rugs/Persian/Hamadan/Kolyai_Rugs_and_Carpets.htm
Regards,
R. John Howe
Thanks, John. Holy cow!! Those rugs were all "camel's hair Hamadans" when I left town.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Rug Grave Yards
Hello All:
I am not afraid to answer your question, Richard, for it will not populate the
places I have located with other buyers because I will only mention the areas
where I have found wonderful rugs and not the vendors.
The first place is England. This country is full of old homes with old rugs.
Next is New England in America. Here these seven states are also full of old
homes and many have old rugs on the floors.
And other place in the USA is California. Not so many really old homes but surprising
the Bay Area and the Los Angeles basin both have proven to be fruitful places
to hunt old rugs.
Lastly, Turkey is another country where one can find great old rugs. However,
unlike the other areas, here it is tough to buy them for pennies on the dollar,
as the rug dealer there get all the rugs and they do not end up in small antique
shops or swap meets.
So good hunting and don’t forget that often the best rugs are sold for a pittance
of their real value. You just have to be in the right place at the right time
and be able to recognize an important old piece even though it is filthy dirty
and often ragged from use.
Rich -
Have you ever tried your rug-hunting luck at Brimfield? The next session opens
on Tuesday.
On a related note, I recommend reading "Brimfield Rush". It's a good read.
Regards,
Bob
Rich -
It may be a bit far for you, but the "Brimfield Rush" is not just something
to be read about, it needs to be experienced.
My favorite "field" used to by Mays, where neither dealers nor customers were
allowed in until a given time. I think one of the times in my life when I knew
I had no control over my body was when the gates opened and a line, half a mile
long, began to surge through Mays' gates. You had to stay on your feet and keep
moving or you would certainly die. The word "rush" actually doesn't quite describe
it adequately.
BUT, a lot of the "antique" furniture we own was bought in Brimfield about 20
years ago. We did well, but also learned experientially (we'd already read the
books) what a "marriage" is in the antique furniture world.
Thanks, Bob.
I've heard that eBay has eroded Brimfield some these days, but it would be good
to be with you there next Tuesday.
Regards,
R. John Howe
Sayed,
Thanks for the reply. I have only one more question and I think I won't have
to bother you with this any further.
How do you manage to be in the right place at the right time?
Incidentally, Sayed, I live in New England and I know there are a lot of rugs
hiding behind those walls. However, I think there is a lot of heavy duty competition
to get them from buyers who know what they're doing.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Richard,
Hmmmm...
I suppose you have to be in a lot of places at a lot of times... with a "prepared
mind"... and enough money... and an understanding spouse/partner...
Maybe that's why collecting can be invigorating, and somewhat humbling.
James
James:
That "enough money" element is a biggy.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Bob, John:
I'm such a fossil, I can't remember whether I've been to Brimfield or not. My
brother is an antique car parts guy, and I may have gone with him. And I've
discussed it with dealer friends a million times. My sense is that if you didn't
show up at the crack of dawn, etc., and carry a cattle prod to deal with those
people who were trying to trample John, you might as well have stayed home.
Maybe that's not accurate.
We all know that if you simply cruise the countryside looking for oriental rugs,
498 out of every 500 are things you don't even want to think about. I find that
most of what you encounter in antique shops and flea markets (the neat stuff
John serves up for us excepted) comes within the 498. Even in the dedicated
rugs auctions, like Skinner in Boston, one turns one's nose up at probably half
or more of the goods. In the end, I agree with Michael Wendorf that the choicest
stuff is most often held by the best dealers; and one must cultivate a relationship
with them. One also has to be ready to pay value.
But I don't discount or discourage Sayed's approach or attitude. The real fun
is in finding them, I say.
Regards all.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Rich -
You gotta go.
But Brimfield is a WEEK! None of this one morning
stuff.
http://www.brimfieldshow.com/
And it does get picked over, but they stagger the openings of the fields so
the late risers have a chance.
The last time I was there, there were visible dealers with Texas hats and boots
and walkie talkies, skimming things as they opened. Fanny packs facing forward
full of hundred dollar bills. (A typical sign in any local restaurant is "We
do NOT accept 100 dollar bills!!!")
Typical overhead walkie-talkie conversation. "George? Guy here's got a bb-gun.
Iron frame. Looks like a possible. I offered him $30 and when he said no told
him all its faults. Come over and try him again for the same price. I think
I got him discouraged. He's located at..."
Rooms are a problem. Try Worcester, or Amherst or Springfield (Smith rug collection
at the Public Library there) or even Hartford.
Regards,
R. John Howe
John:
Youre a heck of a guide. I know that Smith collection. The home base of Walter
Denny, that and the Fogg.
I'll have to gear up for Brimfield. A fanny pack full of hundreds, you say....
__________________
Rich Larkin
Kolyai Kurdish rugs
I hope everyone finds a beautiful piece at Brimfield.
Rich has asked for more information about Kolyai rugs, wondered why a collection
focused on traditional Kurdish rugs would exclude them and suggested that one
acknowledge the artistic spirit of the Kurdish weaving tradition without the
need for first vetting on structural grounds.
Like most rugs terms, we need to be careful and precise when we talk about Kolyai
and Kurdish rugs. Back in 1953, the year Ted Williams hit .407 in a few games
at Fenway after returning from Korea, Cecil Edwards distinguished three Kurdish
weaves in Persian Kurdistan; the Bijar weave, the Sennah weave and the tribal
weave. He identified then settled tribes such as Qulyahis, Guranis, Senjabis
and Jaffis as the weavers of these rugs "in their tents and cottages." The Persian
Carpet p. 120. He then describes the then current production in Bijar and Sennah
in some detail. When it comes to tribal rugs, he refers to them as the rugs
of those settled or semi-nomadic Kurdish tribes who live in the frontiers of
Persia and notes that the principal area of production lied in a rough circle
of about 50 miles radius centered to the west of Qorveh. Songur was identified
as a market town. pp 125 - 6. Nothing about the structure is discussed or identified.
In this context, Kolyai as a specific term is barely mentioned and Songur is
a market center.
Many later authors and collectors seemed to have often relied on Edwards and
concluded that Kurds have no structure or structures that are theirs but rather
that Kurdish weavers have always adopted the styles of the areas in which they
lived. Thus Bijars, Sennahs and some Hamadans - all rugs woven with different
structures - with saturated colors and good wools are Kurdish even though this
is not consistent with known facts suggesting such catagorization is either
too simple or non-descriptive. It is as if there is no Kurdish weaving tradition
beyond saturated colors and glossy wools. John Collins and I had a back and
forth involving Bijars in Halis 111 and 113 that goes into this is some detail.
Still others have described Kolyai as a tribal name for Kurdish weavers using
a single weft structure. Tad Runge in his well written book One Woman One Weft
states "the tribal name for these Kurdish weavers (followers of the Shia rite
of Islam) is Kolyai. The women of the Kolyai lived in villages just to the west
of of the Hamadan towns of Zagheh and Chenar." p. 42. Eagleton also refers to
Kolyai a medium-large tribe settled in the Qorveh region northeast of Kermanshah.
The rugs with brown that are linked to the JBOC site are more closely related
to rugs associated with Bibikabad and are not necessarily true Kolyai rugs.
Grote-Hasenbalg, writing 100 years ago, associates such rugs with Hamadan-Mianeh.
In Iran these rugs are sometimes called shotore or "camel."
I and some other Kurdish collectors have concluded that when trying to understand
what a traditional Kurdish rug might be first one needs to try and identify
the Kurdish heartland - a term coined by William Eagleton - and then try to
place rugs and groups of rugs based on structural and related techniques and
colors within that. Jim Burns has taken that effort further and divided Kurdistan
into 7 districts each constituting an area where Kurds are in the majority.
In Burns' book Kolyai refers to tribal clans that were primarily nomadic until
the 20th century and whose antique weavings are called Songur - the place they
were marketed. He illustrates several beautiful Kelleh sized carpets with single
wefts and all cotton foundations that must be circa 1800 with distinctive yellows
and reds. These must be workshop carpets. Are they Kurdish? Are they proto-Kurdish?
I would say they are beautiful workshop carpets that might have been woven by
Kurds. He also illustrates smaller, possibly tribal, rugs that have all wool
construction and two wefts between each row of knotted pile. These rugs which
are consistent with the structure of Kurdish rugs woven in other parts of Kurdistan
are called Kolyai or Songur due to coloration. See plate 3 of Antique Rugs of
Kurdistan.
This is all offered to underscore that when I exclude Kolyai rugs from what
I am trying to establish as traditional Kurdish rugs I refer to the single wefted
rugs produced in the areas around Hamadan. Some of them may have been woven
by Kurds and share a certain artistic spirit with some Kurdish tribal weaving,
but they are not Kurdish rugs with a captial K.
More than enough for now, best wishes, michael
Plenty to think about there, Michael. Thank you. I do love those Kurdish rugs from all sources.
__________________
Rich Larkin
Dear folks -
This is Plate 3 from Jim Burns' "Antique Rugs of Kurdistan" that Michael Wendorf
referenced above.
I have given you an overall image and then two details so that you can see a
bit what the color in this piece is like.
First the overall:
Then, a corner, close up.
And here is a detail of the field.
Burns gives quite a bit of structural detail in his caption, but I'll let Michael
provide that if he feels it is useful.
Regards,
R. John Howe
John,
That's my idea of a fabulous rug. Thanks for putting it up. Are there any available
pictures of the back?
__________________
Rich Larkin
Rich -
This book sells for about $250 and likely should have pictures of the "edges"
of these rugs (actually I'm kidding since this is a sumptiously produced book;
no visible expense has been spared). But, no, there are no images of backs.
But Burns, as I said above, does provide some structural details on this piece
in his caption.
"...Characteristic of Koliya'i nomadic weaving is the narrow band of red-face
plain weave at each end, brocaded with a sinle line of natural brown and ivory
wool. The rug is double-wefted and has a thick, floppy handle. The pile is glossy
and the colors, typical of Koliya'i nomadic weaving, are rich and saturated.
As is often found on tribal weavings, the brown-dyed wool has corroded due to
the presence of iron in the mordant..."
Burns estimates this piece as "early 19th century" and says that a similar one
dated 1812-1813 A.D was on the N.Y. market before he was writing this book.
And he does report on the structure of each piece in table format at the end
of this volume. For this piece he says"
Koliya'i
3'8"x6'11" (112x211cm)
knot:symmetrical
warp: wool
weft: wool
wefts between knots: 2-4
knot count: H-6, V-6
sides: overcast
ends: brown weft
Regards,
R. John Howe