MAD Ersari?
Hi all,
I recently purchased a carpet that I find attractive, and
somewhat out of the ordinary.
The dimensions are approximately 8' x 4'.
It has brown wool warps and grey wool wefts, with minimal warp depression.
Knotting is asymmetric-right at approx. 8v x 8h = 64 kpsi. Selvedges are 3 cords
wrapped in brown hair.
The design seems related to the ikat-derived
patterns used by the Ersari - Beshir and other groups in the middle Amu Darya
(MAD) region. One interesting aspect is that the "stepped medallions" (ashik?)
are on a "pole" that runs the length of the rug, so this is not actually a
lattice per se.
The palette is quite light and lively, with three shades
of rosy reds, mid-blue, two greens (forest and deep blue-green), brown, ivory, a
very light "straw" and a very light buttery yellow. The straw is used on the
lower half, and the yellow on the top half, and they are alternated with the
ivory in the interstices of the design to create a lively visual effect. The
second and third pictures (top and bottom) give the best representation of the
colours on my monitor.
Overall, the rug looks "Ersari" to me, and
inspired more by the ikat design family than the Persian designs that seem
favoured in the so-called "Beshir" rugs. Still, I suppose that some might call
this an "Ersari-Beshir". I would add that I haven't seen any other examples that
are close analogies to this one in design (with the exception of the border,
which is a typical Ersari main border).
I would appreciate opinions about
this carpet's attribution, aesthetics and age. Also, if anyone has any analogies
to share, I would be most interested.
James.
Note... I have just
replaced the original pictures with some that I lightened up. The others looked
way to dark on my desktop computer. The second and third pictures (top and
bottom of the carpet) look closest to the real colours on my
monitors.
Hi James,
That is one lovely rug. In fact, it's so nice I'm inclined
to think of it as new production to a studied high standard. The condition looks
too good. Do you know whether there is a well known industry out there producing
rugs of this ilk faithfully in the early manner?
Whether it's best
labeled Ersari, Beshir, Ersari-Beshir, etc., I can't say. Clearly, in earlier
times, there was a variety of rug types produced in that region in some volume,
much of which must have served a robust commercial market. The kind
traditionally called "Beshir" often seem to have more of the perfunctory
workshop look, at least certain ones of them. No doubt, Ersari Turkoman people
were much involved in the endeavor. However, the application of those terms back
and forth doesn't do too much for me in achieving an understanding of what was
going on.
__________________
Rich
Larkin
Hi Rich,
Although I am not an experienced collector, I can say with
little reservation that this is an old rug. How old, I don't know. As for the
condition, it is perhaps not as good as the pictures portray. It is quite worn
through the middle third, and it has a few old repairs (you can see an old
"bite" out of the corner in the picture of the back, as one example of one
repair). In fact, I got it despite its condition (my wife is not a fan of overly
worn carpets). The dynamic design and colours overcome the areas of low pile
(down to knotheads), and thankfully she loves it.
Moreover, the colours,
and especially the light straw and yellow, look old to me. There is also uneven
wear, with some of the colours being lower than others (substantial brown
corrosion).
So I think it is old. However, if there is new production
turning out rugs like this, I would love to find it.
James.
Looks old...
Hi Rich,
Here are a couple more pictures of the rug, demonstrating its
condition.
Cheers,
James.
Beautiful
James,
What a rug! If it's new...and it looks old to me...pls also let
me know who is making them. And if you wife decides it has to go...pls let me
know first. Thanks.
Gene
Thanks, Gene.
For my wife, it was love at first sight, so we'll be
keeping it.
As I mentioned, I am pretty sure that it is old, but without
finding any published analogies I am having a difficult time making any sort of
assessment as to how old. Right now I have narrowed it down to mid-19th to
mid-20th century. So what else is new...
I am trying to put
together a few related weavings from here and there and will share them if I
can.
James.
Hi James
It doesn't look new to me, and my inclination is to attribute
it to the 19th century. The palette seems to place it within the Ersari group,
although I haven't seen that field design on anything from that group. It is
closely related to what is usually called "ashik gul" asmalyks, except that the
guls are more flattened in every asmalyk I've seen, and I don't recall many that
had Ersari palettes.
Regards
Steve Price
Thanks, Steve.
Interestingly, one of the things my wife said about it
was "it looks like a big asmalyk". I agree that the palette seems Ersari -
Beshir, though it is brighter than others that I have seen. I think the main
border is typically Ersari.
James.
Hi James,
In fact, it is a giant asmalyk with the triangle at the top
removed and the scar cleverly masked by a master weaver from Istanbul. Just
kidding.
I agree with the avalanche of opinion that it is an old piece.
The second posting of the image helps a lot to see it for what it is. Before I
got onto TurkoTek and learned that you had to have reasons supported by evidence
for your rug opinions, I had a simple rule of thumb for Ersari/Beshir types. It
was that the choice ones had brilliant colors of red, yellow and blue, among
others, on a special quality of silky, transparent wool. When you found them,
they were usually oversized juvals or torbas in my experience. Yours looks like
it is from that group. Although a repetitive array of devices like this could
easily have come out boring, the skillful handling of the concept in this
instance avoided that fate very successfully.
Once again, James, your
keen eye and unfailing judgment are in play. BTW, I am beginning to become
suspicious of your protestation that you are "...not an experienced
collector."
__________________
Rich
Larkin
Hi Rich,
I think it was precisely because of the "brilliant" colours
and fine wool that I was attracted to this rug. The white/yellow ground also
gives it a lively flair.
Although the design seems unusual, I suppose
this is not surprising since the Ersari-Beshir seem to have become quite
eclectic under the influence of other weaving traditions (e.g. Central Asian
ikats) and the markets around Bukhara.
I mentioned in my first post that
I think this design is more related to the ikat. I'll try to illustrate that.
However, Steve's mention of the asmalyk has made me wonder if that was a main
influence for this design.
James.
I'll have an Ersari to go, hold the Beshir
good evening everyone
What a rug. I too am suspicious of James’
constant poor mouthing. After all, I benefited from years of listening to Bear
Bryant talk about his “little, skinny legged boys” not having a
chance.
Here is my two bits worth of opinion. Moskova claimed that for a
rug to be a “Beshir,” the ground color would be unique, contrasting to the
elements in the field, and the ground color was not used in those field elements
unlike the rest of Turkmen rugdom. If this has held, and depending on how you
define the “ground color” of James' rug, opt for Ersari…and
hold the Beshir.
For some vaguely analogous use of
asymik gol symbol, see Jourdan (on line), p. 277, 279, and also 281-whose design
is mentioned as being possbily derived from an ikat. http://members.fortunecity.com/mustafamercan/
Yo!...whoa…though...bro.
What about the minimal depression, As2 knotting (or with depression, As4)? Well,
Tekke are commonly supposed to use As2 knotting, and the border motif, the
“curled leaf pattern,” is one that supposedly is originally connected to the
Tekke. But, warp and weft don’t really fit Tekke too well as most of their warps
are supposedly ivory and their selvedges simple, often blue, but not often
multiple-baluch-like 3 cord goat-looking like in James' rug.
It could be
Yomut…the colors would not preclude that at all especially in a main carpet and
the style could be consistent. But again the structure doesn’t fit all that
well,. Also, Yomut often use cotton in the structure…and this is wool (?)
So…
Back to Ersari…. The brown warps, gray wefts fit, and As2 (or As4)
knot is ok-especially archaically-though As1 and As3 might be thought of as more
common…. I thought of Chub Bash, a supposedly Ersari offshoot that is in
Northern Afganistan that supposedly often uses some Yomut or Chodour motifs. But
this does not have what I have read is C.B. coloring.
So…that leaves one
supposedly Ersari sub group that this fits structurally pretty completely, Kizil
Ayak I would guess your carpet might be a Kizil Ayak with the Tekke derived,
early curled leaf border, and the Baluch-looking, wide selvedges. It could be
older, based on the "archaic" 8/8 ratio. But even if it isn’t, it is qute a
carpet. The "flames" surrounding each gol
with a different interior symbol and constantly changing color combos are
fascinating.
One of my wild hair thoughts....The Kizil Ayak peoples, I
think named after a village on the north-east of the Amu Darya, originally were
reported to be a sub branch of the Ersari by O'Donovon. In the 1980s, Pinner and
O'Bannon revised modern opinion to view the "Kizil Ayak" as racially different
from the Ersari. The KzAy themseleves supposedly regarded themselves as Tekke
related.
But a lot earlier, Moskova reported that the entire population
of the Kizil Ayak village region may have changed abruptly beginning about WWI,
and certainly after the Russian Revolution. The population inhabiting the area
later, and declared to be separate from the Ersari by Pinner, may not have been
the same population reported by O’Donovon et. al. Those people may have migrated
to Afghanistan. This could explain why there are some pretty different types of
carpets called “Kizil Ayak.”
Whew...that was fun...now for the historical
influence early Tibetan (Buddist) dominance, heavily altered by
Zoroastrianism, played in the symbology of the region, sourced probably
from East Turkistan (Khotan). This is proved by both the name of
"Bokhara," and the fact that a Zoroastrian symbol is possibly the
original source of the asymik gol. Furthermore, the "barber pole" tree-trunks
holding the gols in James' rug are directly akin to those in Baluch tree-of-life
prayer carpets, rooted in the mystic "may pole" of indo-european mythodology,
and..... Oh...some other time.
Regards, Jack
Hi all,
Although I haven't found any other examples with a similar
design to my rug, there are some analogies that might be related.
There
was a nice discussion on Turkotek about the lattice initiated by David Hunt a
while back (found here... http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00111/s111_t3.htm). Among the
examples are the following.
I find the last one of the
ikat coat particularly interesting as it seems to put the lattice on a "pole"
structure, which is somewhat analagous (with considerable abstraction) to the
design on my rug.
Steve Price
mentioned the asmalyk as another design that is somewhat analagous. Here is an
example from Barry O'Connell's site (http://www.spongobongo.com/dddr61.htm).
In this example, there is
a "pole" upon which the ashik-type guls are arranged.
So far, those are
the closest design analogies I have come up with.
James.
Hi Jack,
Thanks for the feedback and insights. I think that Steve,
Filiberto, John and other Turkotek "old-timers" can confirm how new I am to this
"old rug" hobby. They were very patient with my early posts that betrayed my
ignorance. Thankfully, I stumbled upon Turkotek and a few other resources that
have helped me to better understand rugs and to refine my taste. Perhaps more
importantly, my travels have allowed me to see a lot of old rugs, even if I
don't always know what I am looking at. This particular rug taught me a new
lesson. Make sure you see ALL of the rugs, even if you have already seen some
that pique your interest. Once you find a few pieces that interest you, dealers
naturally refrain from distracting you by showing you a bunch of other ones.
This one was at the bottom of one of the many big piles, and although I have
visited this dealer several times in the past, he had never shown it to me
(though he thought he had). Luckily I spotted the tell-tale Ersari border from
the back and asked to have a closer look.
I hadn't thought about a Kizil
Ayak attribution for this rug, though I do know that they were comingled with
the Ersari in the MAD area and N. Afghanistan. I'll try to get a clearer and
closer picture of the back of the rug to see if those who know Turkmen structure
have any insights.
With regard to design, this rug has piqued my interest
in whether some Turkoman designs might have "gone West". Might the ashik design
we see in Yomut asmalyks derive from the eastern Ersari and other groups and
their ikat-inspired designs?
David Hunt made some interesting
observations related to this in a previous Turkotek discussion (http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00111/s111_t1.htm)
Cheers,
James.
Back...
Hi all,
Here is another shot of the back that gives a better look at
the structure.
James.
Hi James
Most "ashik gul" asmalyks have "poles" running vertically.
The one you show has gul interiors that are quite unusual - most look more like
the interiors of the ashiks on your rug.
I'm not optimistic about the
possibility of attribution becoming more specific than Ersari group. We'll
see.
Regards
Steve Price
Thanks Steve.
I realize that much of this design geneology is mere
speculation on my part. Frankly, I am skeptical that any assertions about how
such a rug design evolved can be finally proven.
Your caution about
trying to get too specific about attribution is well taken, and akin to the
advice you gave for the first rug (a flaming boteh "Shirvan") I posted on
Turkotek about 2 1/2 years ago. As I was then, I am content without overly
precise attributions, especially when the evidence base is shaky. Still, I do
find that it is a good learning process to pursue some of these speculations a
bit. For example, comparing this rug to two other "Ersari / Beshir" group rugs
that I own, I can see substantial differences in design (Mina Khani, "Herati"
and this one), structure ("ASR-fine", "ASR-loose" and ASL) and palette. Perhaps
that is why a number of authors have made attempts to become a bit more specific
about the rugs of this group (notably Erik Risman and colleagues -- Turkotek
discussion and additional references here... http://www.turkotek.com/mini_salon_00013/ms13_t1.htm). I am
not aware of any further developments in this line of study. There was some
mention that further results would be discussed at the ICOC conference. Perhaps
John or someone else who attended can let us know if there were further
developments.
Still, "Ersari group" is fine, and maybe as good as it gets
at this point for this one.
James.
Hi James,
Well, that thing was lurking at the bottom of the guy's
pile. Wow. It gives one hope.
I'm with Steve on the matter of restraint
in attribution. Certainly, the rug is within the category we recognize as
Ersari, a pretty broad group. No doubt, we will never fully account for the
differences we encounter under that rubric. Nevertheless, it's fun, and
necessary, to go through the parsing.
Aside to Jack: Tekke? Yomud? Huh?
I'm glad you stopped where you did. I could feel an Afshari attribution coming
on like a freight train!!
__________________
Rich
Larkin
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Larkin
Aside to Jack: Tekke? Yomud? Huh? I'm glad you stopped where you did. I could feel an Afshari attribution coming on like a freight train!!
Hi Steve,
I know what you mean that this doesn't fit neatly into the
general ikat-derived design group. Let me try another categorization for Ersari
rugs.
1) Gul group -- This includes the various versions of rugs and
carpets that have the typical gulli gul, and perhaps we can include other gul
(e.g. tauk nosha) types in this broad group.
2) "Persian"? design group
-- Which could include the variant "Herati" and Mina Khani rugs that seem to
have been influenced by market demand for these types of designs.
3) Ikat
and other "freelance" designs -- In addition to the more typical ikat-influenced
designs, this category would include a broad range of other rugs and carpets
that seem to have ill-defined pedigrees.
These are obviously overly
simplistic, but I feel a compulsion to try to sort the various Ersari group
weavings by design, even though I am not knowledgable enough to do it
convincingly.
Jourdan remarks (p. 256): "There are distinct differences
in design, palette and structure between the many pile weavings that are
generally identified with the Ersari or several Ersari sub-tribes. A subdivision
seems therefore essential but it is no less problematic than that of the Yomut
groups".
He goes on to mention that Hans König attempted to divide
"Ersari" carpets into four design groups (Hali 4/2 and "Turkmen" - Thompson).
Does anybody have either of these references, and if so, could they indicate how
König divided the Ersari designs?
Cheers,
James.
Hi James
I have the feeling that, like me, you're a "lumper" when it
comes to attribution. One of the things that gives guys like us fits is the
occasional piece that refuses to match one of our lumps. This, I think, is one
of those pieces. It clearly isn't part of the Ersari traditional Turkmen gul
design lump (but not far from the one that includes ashik gul asmalyks), clearly
isn't part of the Persianate design lump, and, at least in my view, isn't part
of the ikat design lump. That should take care of all the Ersari stuff, and
usually does. But not this time. It makes lumpers everywhere feel
uncomfortable.
Regards
Steve Price
Mistrust, mistunderstood
Steve, Rich - Have you no faith? Of course I was not thinking it
"Afshar" (though the flames around the guls, the open right
constrution???...nahhhh)... James' rug is obviously
Baluch.
Jan Begi Williams
Hi Steve,
By definition, we epidemiologists are "lumpers". I find that
it helps to do that to gain a broad understanding of things, and perhaps more
importantly, it allows us to identify and study the exceptions more readily.
Sometimes the exceptions are significant and teach us a lot, but many times they
are just red herrings and serve as a distraction. The problem is that one often
doesn't know which is which.
James.
Sometimes the exceptions are significant and teach us a lot, but many
times they are just red herrings and serve as a distraction. The problem is that
one often doesn't know which is which.
Hi James
Finding out
which is which is what makes the game fun, though. Right? And you'll never catch
fish if you never go fishing.
Regards
Steve Price
Steve,
Exactly... much of the fun of this rug thing is exploring the
exceptions, even if they turn out to be rather mundane.
James.
Not Baluch??
Well, Jack, maybe you have something there with the Baluch suggestion.
Here is a Baluch
pictured by Patrick Weiler in Istanbul as part of his new Salon on the latest
ICOC meeting.
Note the small crosses in the guls. Could this indicate that this and my
rug fit into a previously unrecognized group: the Afsho-Armenian-Balucho-Ersari,
otherwise known as the Prince Bukhara type?
Cheers,
James.
Baluch rules
James, if someone pressed me to attribute that carpet, I would quickly
default to "Ersari," not Baluch, and as in your carpet, I would "hold the
Beshir." Furthermore, I would state that is a unique and interesting Ersari
composition. I wonder what kindred spirit attributed that carpet to
"Baluch?"
By the way...there is a fairly well known Tekke carpet-chuval
with an Armenian inscriptionand date on it. I am looking for an on-line picture
now.
Today I found a very good historical/geographic summary of the
problems of Ersari attribution that I will add to this post. It notes the flight
of quite a few obas and refugee turkmen to the Ersari regions of the Amu Darya
and attributes the wide range of patterns to that influx of Saryks, Salors, and
Yomuts. It also subdivides Ersari weavings roughly by "left bank nomad," "right
bank urban-Beshir." Interesting. more later.
Regards, Jack
Hi all,
Just a few more musings and examples about this "Ersari group"
rug.
First, another thought about the field design is that it is a
repetitive use of a border design that is seen on Ersari carpets. Here is the
rug again with a couple of examples of Ersari rugs with a border that looks
closely related.
These two
examples are from Barry O'Connell's site. The second one looks Uzbek.
The border of my rug is not
uncommon, but I have notice that the drawing has some variations. Mine has two
main designs. The first is seen in the three blue-on-red compartments, where it
almost looks like there is a blue double-headed bird inside the jagged triangle.
The second is a second is just a straightforward rendering of two jagged
triangles (without the bottom), one inside the other (like the brown-on-white
section on the left side).
Here is
another example (from Barry O'Connell's site) of an old Ersari carpet that has a
similar drawing of the main border as mine, especially the "double bird head"
along the top of the rug.
Others,
including this next one (from Jourdan, plate 236), have a more well-defined
"curled leaf" design. The main difference seems to be that this "curled leaf"
version does not complete the triangle for a symmetric design. I wonder if the
more formal "curled leaf" seen here is perhaps a later formalization of the
earlier design.
I am not
sure if these details are significant in the overall scheme of Ersari designs,
but I thought I would share these observations.
James
P.S. Jack,
that rug photographed by Patrick in Turkey does look unusual for Baluch, but I
would still attribute it as "Baluch group". The design and palette just somehow
doesn't look Ersari to me. One clue for me is the innermost border. I have seen
this on some later Tekke pieces (end 19th, early 20th), but usually ascribe that
to the Baluch, and more specifically to the Salar Khani (this doesn't have a
Salar Khani palette, though).
I'm...er...sorry, its Ersari...
James, I think your rug has that curled leaf and varient, orginally thought
to be Tekke. I really like that rug and am continuing to look into it's design
and attribution.
That "baluch rug"...I'm...er...sorry, I just don't see
it as Baluch. That inner most border is fairly rare (according to a fairly
extensive look I did some time ago), but usually found on Tekkes of about the
turn of the century as you noted. I'll grant it is occasionally it is seen in
Baluch, but not in the coloring of this rug. The Salor Khani are related to the
Saryk through a complicated relationship, l think. But the palatte of that rug,
the borders, the designs...that is Turkmen without the baluch touch, in my
opinion. It is almost as interesing as your rug.
Here is a short
summary of the "Ersari question" that is one of the best I've found.
Though we all think we have an idea about these Turkmen groups, the Ersari are
particularlly troublesome, as we know. This is pretty good, from the
following:
http://www.sfbars.org/ersari.html
"A Note on
Ersari Group Turkmen Weavings. By Peter Poullada"
"Most of the
weavings commonly assigned to the Ersari Turkmen are in fact a highly eclectic
and heterogeneous group of textiles. Showing remarkable variety in both design
and techniques, the weavings attributed to the Ersari represent one of the last
frontiers of textile research and an area full of misunderstandings among
Turkmen collectors. Studies by Koenig, Thompson, Moshkova and Eiland have
pointed out the stylistic and technical inconsistency of the pieces commonly
labeled Ersari. To summarize some of what is known and what is still to be
debated and clarified.
"The Ersari appear to have been one of the
major components of the Sayin Khan-Salor tribal confederacy whose Yurt, (nomadic
territory) in the late 15th, 16th and 17th centuries, stretched from the Balkhan
mountains to the Mangishlaq peninsula and north to the Emba river. The label
Sayin Khani, given to these Turkmen by the Safavid Persians referred to their
emergence from the breakup of the Golden Horde, (founded by Chingiz Khan's
grandson Batu, known as the Sayin Khan), in order to differentiate their origins
from tribes that came from the territories of Hulegu (Iran) or Chaghatay
(Trans-Oxanian Central Asia). The Sayin Khani Turkmen appear to have been a
loosely organized confederation of tribes said to be divided, in typical
Turco-Mongol fashion, into two parts, the Ichki (inner) and Tashki (outer),
Salor. Along with the Tekke, Saryk and Yomut, the Ersari were said to be part of
the Tashki although our main source for this information, Abu'l Ghazi, the Uzbek
Khan of Khiva in the 17th century, does not indicate whether the term Tashki
refers to an organizational, military or purely geographical meaning. We do
know, however, that sometime in the 17th century, due perhaps, in part to the
drying up of the western Uzboy channel of the AmuDarya, the Ersari and elements
of other tribes associated with them (like the Qizil Ayaq, and the Ali Eli)
moved east to the banks of the main course of the Amu Darya between Kelif and
Chardjui. Later in the 18th and early 19th centuries, in response to political
pressures and military defeats, groups of Salor, Saryqs and Chodor fled to the
same regions along the banks of the middle reaches of the Amu Darya which had
become refuge areas for tribes pushed out of Manqishlaq and Khwarezm
(Khiva).
"The creation of this new middle Amu Darya Yurt, (whose
members came to be known as Lebab or Lab-e-Ab Turkmen, meaning "riverside
Turkmen") led to several special features that are expressed in the weavings of
the Ersari Group: First, the use of designs associated with many other tribes,
in keeping with the assimilation and mixing of the Ersari with Salors, Saryqs
etc. Secondly, the tribes settled along the right bank of the AmuDarya (the
north) came under the political, commercial and cultural control of the Khanate
of Bukhara whose court and urban culture created demand for larger scale
ceremonial weavings (as opposed to dowry and other utilitarian nomadic weavings)
and which exerted design influence over the weaving communities. Bukharan
influence may also have encouraged the right bank Ersari to become semi-nomads
with permanent settlements (Qishlaq) in the regions of Beshir, Burdalyk etc.
This had the further effect, by the mid 19th century of allowing these weaving
communities to become much more economically dependent on carpet production than
the more nomadic groups to the west. Thirdly, because the middle Amy Darya
Ersari groups were within the territories of the Khanate of Bukhara they were
not as directly effected by the conquests and colonization by the Russians in
the last quarter of the 19th century as their fellow Turkmen in Khiva, Merv and
the Akhal oases. this may have allowed some of the left bank Ersari to preserve
for longer their nomadic weaving tradition, slowed the commercialization of
their production and delayed the adoption of the synthetic dyes which became so
prevalent by the turn of the century among the Tekke and Yomut. finally the
conquest of Central Asia by the Bolsheviks in the 1920's and even into the early
1930's led to a substantial migration of Ersari and other Lebab Turkmen from the
Middle Amu Darya Yurt to join their brethren in northern Afghanistan, where they
took up semi-nomadic lifestyle especially around the towns of Andkhoy, Aqcha and
Shibergan. This resulted in even more realignments of clan and tribal linkages
and in mixing and confusing of weaving traditions and designs. For this reason
20th century Afghan Ersari, even including semi-antique production form the
1920's and 1930's when large number of carpets seem to have begun to be
exported, is highly eclectic and difficult to attribute with much certainty to
specific clans or sub-tribes. The last point to note about Ersari textiles is
that unlike Tekke, Yomut, Salor or Saryq, the weavings we now call Ersari are
relatively under-represented in the major Russian collections like Bogolyubov
and Dudin, and thus are less accessible to study. This is true of both the
left-bank nomadic tradition weavings and the right-bank more urban influenced
pieces that are commonly given the "Beshir" label. For all of the reasons given
here, and above all for their beauty and variety, the Ersari Group of Turkmen
weavings are very worthy of our attention."
Thanks, Jack.
I had read that article by Poullada a while back but it
had escaped my mind.
I know that there have been various theories about
the "curled leaf" border, with some suggesting that it has zoomorphic roots.
Having read and enjoyed Opie's tribal rugs, I am able to see bird heads in
almost any angular design. Still, it does seem that the approach to this border
design in mine and other older Ersari carpets seems to deviate in some
significant ways from the later and more usual "curled leaf" design. Whether we
will ever be able to divine whether this holds and significance, and if so what
it means seems highly doubtful. Still, I suppose it might be an interesting
minor study to look at various renditions of this Ersari border to see if there
are any features that seem to correlate with age and other attributes.
I
agree that that rug in Turkey looks unlike a Baluch in many respects. Still, I
think it leans closer to Baluch than Ersari, but that is just an impression. I
suppose structural information would have helped in this case.
By the
way, if anyone has access to Konig's categorization of Ersari designs that was
reportedly published in Hali 4/2 I would be interested and
grateful.
James.
James
Hi People
I can't tell from the image on my monitor whether the
palette on that rug is more nearly Belouch or more nearly Ersari. If it has some
light to medium blue, green, and/or yellow, my guess would be Ersari. If not,
I'd guess Belouch.
One factor on which I place some weight is the source.
The Arasta Bazaar dealers are mostly pretty knowledgable about the rugs that
they sell; some are genuine experts and one of them chaired ICOC. Since the
dealer had it in his hands and eyes and calls it Belouch, I'd default to that
attribution unless there was some fairly compelling reason to do
otherwise.
Regards
Steve Price
My vote
Baluch.
Gene
Folks:
My vote would be withheld pending seeing and handling the
piece. I note that Patrick reported on it initially. Do we know whether he
handled it, or opined on the provenance on his own part?
(All things are
possible among the Baluchi.)
__________________
Rich
Larkin
Similar carpet
Hi James,
A beautiful Ersari (?) carpet there. You mentioned not having
seen many like it. I believe that Erik Risman has a similar piece on the floor
in his living room; I do not remember the border on his rug, however. If ever
there was a MAD man, it is Erik and he will certainly be able to offer you a
studied opinion on your rug.
I am glad that your wife has taken to your
find and understand why you would not want to part with it. If, however, you
need someone to babysit the rug while you are out of the country I would be glad
to volunteer my services.
Chris
__________________
Chris
Countryman
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the compliments on the rug. We'll manage with it
in our place for now.
Thanks for mentioning Erik Risman. I have read
about him. I think I'll see if I can send a note to him and get his feedback
about the rug.
James.
Hans Köning paper
Bonjour James
I have found the Hans Köning paper in Hali 4/2.
In
this article HK describes the variations of Ersari's design and try to make the
links with ersari groups. He distinguishes tribal designs (i.e. guls ' carpets
with tribal sizes), quasi-tribal designs (geometric designs showing turkomanoid
motifs in a non traditional way : generally all over geometric designs with
lattice or pannel disposition), ikats designs, floral or foreign designs (e.i.
mina khani and cloud band). Your rug is clearly from the quasi-tribal design
group. HK does'nt assign a group's name to this type of production. I can scan
the hali's pages and send them to you. I think Steve can send me your email for
this transmission.
In the HK paper there is an exemple of quasi ribal
design with pannel design that shows the same border than your's. It seems that
there is a group of ersari carpets that shows commun caracteristics : all over
geometric design with diagonal lattice or orthogonal pannel disposition and a
narrow and simple border. There is another ex of this type in the Bennett's book
(rugs and carpets of the world) with boteh/lattice design.
In my opinion
your rug is 1) an ersari rug, 2) a beautifull rug, well designed by a skillfull
weaver, 3) a "tribal" workshop work rather than a pure nomadic
product.
The design, if it is non conventinal, shows nevertheless
undisputable turkmen design vocabulary. HK in his paper shows a 3000 BC
turmenistan ceramic showing the same toothed bar detail that is recurent in
numerous turkmen weavings.
Amicales salutations à tous
Bonjour Louis,
Bien merci!
Thanks very much for taking the time
to find that reference and sharing the information with me. I think this summary
fits well with my very general perspective on this rug. It also fits with
feedback I have received offline from some noted writers on Turkmen weavings. In
terms of age, their assessment was "3rd quarter or perhaps mid-19th century" and
"last third of the 19th century".
Of course I would be delighted to
receive scanned pages of this information. Steve should have my email
address.
James
P.S. Further to my previous post about the
variations of this main border, here is an old "Beshir" carpet that uses the
same variant as mine and some others. It was sold by Rippon Boswell who
catalogued it as early 19th century (and estimated it at 42,000 Euros). In my
opinion it is a remarkable carpet.
what does make this rug a great rug ?
James
As numerous turkotekers I feel a little bit jalous about your
rug. I think it is a great rug and I am trying to write the reasons
why.
I think the design is very attractive because the weavers has worked
in the same time with a very regular general scheme and with irregular little
variations in the details. The field is drawn in a very straight manner. The
alternating white toothed devices on the diagonals make a dazzeling effect. The
centers change of design for each row and alternate colours on the same row, and
on the same diagonal line. Vertical virtual lines appear by the game of the
little lines drawn arround the blue squares and of the little barber-poles
linking the upper and lower corner of the red squares.
The fact that the
white triangles in the borders are not regularly disposed and that they don't
match with the field lattice enhance the separation between the field and the
border and create a special visual effect. Variations in the border details are
also very pleasant.
All in the design is made for the eyes cannot find any
rest : The look is obliged to run in a stopless manner into the field and around
the borders. In my opinion this is why this rug is great. We could also speak
about the colours : they are kingly simple : red, blue, white and yellow (with
some shades and variations). Making a so great effect with a so simple palette
is a sign of great art.
All of those caracteristics can indicate that
this rugs has been woven by a skilfull weaver, with a great tribal experience
but with the freedom of a person who is not yet under the control of the tribe's
eyes ("my daughter you cannot make this type of design because this is not OUR
tradition"), but in a village or town workshop, making rugs for the market. The
interior market (for rich and powerfull persons who can appreciate the quality
of the quasi-tribal style), and the foreign market. The freedom of the design
can also be a sign of a quite early XIX° rug, before the serial production that
have killed the creativity of the weavers.
We can imagine the same design
made without any fantasy and irregularity : the result would be quite boring
because too stiff.
Really a great rug.
Louis Dubreuil
Why a duck?
To resolve any issues regarding the attribution of the rug I posted, I
actually wrote "Baluch?", not "Baluch!".
And the reason I did so was to "get
a rise" out of (scratch that, I meant "generate some interest" from) some
Turkotekers who like to broaden the category of Baluch about as much as Susan
Bayraktaroglu of the General Directorate of Foundations does with Turkish rugs.
She was convinced that all of the rugs at the Ankara museum were Turkish, even
some I would have thought otherwise, such as this piece:
I did not get close enough
to the actual rug to see if there was a tag on it, and I did not go into the
store, for fear that I would not be allowed to leave without buying something!
Those Turkish rug dealers are FIERCE!!!
Patrick Weiler