Guido has noted:
"if the symbol is copied by
generations, the weaving might be determined by the strict conservative
rules of the tribal community."
From Wikipedia:
"In some religions,
such as Hermeticism, Gnosticism, Judaism and Islam, there is a tradition
that the universe is categorised into Seven Heavens or Realms."
And
this:
"The Qur'an mentions the existence of seven heavens:
"See you
not how Allah has created the seven heavens one above another, and made
the moon a light in their midst, and made the sun a Lamp?"
Many old
rugs have a mihrab with a hanging lamp.
Here are a couple of rugs which
perhaps have included these seven heavens into their designs.
The first
is the mihrab of a 19th century Melas rug. Note the seven floral figures
and the scattered amulets which may have been protective devices.
Many
rugs show such apotropaic motifs (Intended to ward off evil) which have
been passed down through the generations.
And an older Baluch balisht with the
ubiquitous Tree of Life design. It just happens to have seven branches
(including the top).
Younger versions have lost this
tradition.
Notice also the amulets and "S" motifs in the field.
These pieces do not
necessarily confirm the premise which Guido has proposed, but they
certainly suggest that there may be some relevance.
In the modern era
it is somewhat difficult to recall that only a few generations ago, most
cultures passed down the beliefs, proscriptions, propitious rituals and
superstitions which had the status of dogma.
These beliefs were
unassailable, ubiquitous and incontrovertible.
Consider the "evil
eye", the rabbits foot for good luck, tossing salt over the shoulder,
prayer beads and on and on. How can we assume that many of these features
in rugs do not incorporate the traditional beliefs and motifs of the
cultures that wove them, as opposed to being merely decorative
devices?
As to the first piece shown by Guido, he mentions a "man" in
the white arch.
The similar piece Dinie shows has this white arch
"upside down" compared to the Guido piece. If the pile is oriented in a
downward fashion in both of these pieces, does this mean that Dinie has an
upside-down man? The interpretation of Guido's daughter aside, the "man"
interpretation is not what comes readily to my mind.
Some of Guido's
suggestions are tenuous in my estimation, but this does not mean that his
proposal is entirely invalid.
There is probably more relevance than not
when considering older pieces, although some of the interpretations can be
speculative, if not fanciful.
Patrick Weiler