| Subject | : | Shared designs |
| Author | : | Deschuyteneer Daniel |
| Date | : | 02-10-2000 on 08:17 a.m. |
Dear Michael and you all, Here is one of your comments concerning the
Stephen Louw mafrash panel actually on display in the show and tell forum.
“It is interesting how many of these borders and field designs were shared
by different weaving groups quite distant and separated from each other “
Did you noticed that the Afshar used the same “trefoil” floral device as
in three of your Kurdish rugs ? Here is a picture containing above an
Afshar mafrash panel (Hali 91 page40) and below a close up of two of your
Kurdish rugs.  One
possibility to explain this feature is that this Afshar mafrash could have
been woven in North West Persia. (an Afshar enclave is known south of
Bidjar) or that the Kurdish tribes and the Afshar learned to weave this
design when they were inhabiting Eastern Anatolia (before migrating to
North West Persia Afshar tribes settled south of lake Van). Thanks,
Daniel |
| Subject | : | RE:Shared designs |
| Author | : | Michael Wendorf |
| Date | : | 02-10-2000 on 09:40 a.m. |
| Dear Daniel: You are absolutely correct to point out the shared design of this trefoil floral device. The mafrash panel you depict was, in fact, referenced in the exhibition as a related example. I never heard it called "trefoil" before, but I like the "trefoil" description so let's use it. I wish it were only with a few Afshars so that we could accept your thesis. Unfortunately, the distinctive trefoil design also appears on Qashqai, Transcaucasian, Khamseh and the weavings of other groups. In the exhibition, I listed a group of I think 12 published weavings with the same trefoil design. I will follow this post later today with that list but it includes a really old piece from the Transcaucasus advertised several months agoo by Asad Khan and the cover piece from Black & Loveless' book on South Persian pieces. This same device also appears in some of the palmettes of the Sauj Bulagh rug in the exhibition and which is depicted in a previous post. Given its appearance as one of only two designs I have identified on the group of ivory ground long rugs with the rosette and shrub border coming right off the early formal Kurdistan garden carpets, I would like to think the trefoil device has a Kurdish origin. Of course, the Kurdistan garden carpets like the McMullan carpet may themselves be the product of an earlier pan-persian design pool. However, I have never really been able to find a device in classical carpets from any area that included a device that seemed to be the genesis of this trefoil device. This again leads me back to something I have suggested before. To wit: that the contribution of Kurdish weavers to the design pool and traditions of Persian weaving are rich and greatly underestimated. Thanks for your post, great Salon! Michael |
| Subject | : | RE:Shared designs |
| Author | : | Michael Wendorf |
| Date | : | 02-10-2000 on 07:58 p.m. |
| Dear Daniel: Further to the last post, here are a few more cites to other weaving groups using the trefoil design element : Khamseh-Cover of Woven Gardens by Black and Loveless. See also Hali, Vol. 2, No.3. Arab Baluch- Atlantic Collections plate 295. Transcaucasian- Hali 105, page 57 (Asad Khan) Qashqai-Krikor Markarian, image not available There are some minor differences, mostly in coloration, between these pieces. But the same is true of the Kurdish examples. I have a bag face, barely discernable in the original image posted of the group of four long rugs, the two long rugs, as well as a sauj bulagh example posted elsewhere in which it appears in two directions in different places. They all are colored a little different. Also some are contained in a lattice, others as part of an overall field motif. What they all have in common is the distinctive trefoil drawing which at times can be quite a strong feeling ornament. I have wondered whether there is a possible connection between these devices and those found on another group of distinctive so-called "tuning fork" Kurdish long rugs, an example of which can be seen at Hali 70, page 93, plate 15. Interestingly, this group of rugs often has a border which contains the "L" shaped bud we discussed in connection with the jaf bag belonging to Kenneth Thompson. Any thoughts? Thank you, Michael |
| Subject | : | RE:Shared designs |
| Author | : | Deschuyteneer Daniel |
| Date | : | 02-11-2000 on 12:06 a.m. |
| Dear Michael, Trying to explain how various tribes used this trefoil design needs more research. This, can be a good topic for a next Salon. What’s sure following the related examples you have listed is that this design is shared by tribes which once inhabited South Kurdistan or North West Persia. Also some Kamseh attribution have been revised. One of this example is illustrated in Hali 105 page 103. This chanteh from the William Otter Gibbs Collection (which was on display on the Cloudband web site) with a related distinctive central “trefoil” design has been called earlier Kamseh by Mark Whiting, though Purdon prefers actually an Afshar attribution. Another source of this design are Ottoman silk textile. Compare the picture of this Afshar chanteh and the picture of the 17th-18th century Anatolian village rug illustrated in the same Hali 105 page 105, with a design adapted from Ottoman silk textile TIEM inv.N°310- Thanks, Daniel |
| Subject | : | RE:Shared designs |
| Author | : | Michael Wendorf |
| Date | : | 02-11-2000 on 07:53 a.m. |
| Dear Daniel: The William Otter Gibbs Afshar example found at Hali 105, p 103 is another good example. Especially interesting is the alternating brown and ivory used in the stem/trunk of the flower/shrub. The same effect is used in a few of the Kurdish examples I have seen. The design would seem to be an old one. If you accept the 18th century dating of the Transcaucasian carpet advertised in Hali 105 with this design (or anything close to it), a carpet where the design seems already degenerate or at least loose, then the design must have come from somewhere else, perhaps Kurdistan, earlier. In any event, I agree it is worth more study. Also, the reference to the Anatolian carpet in Hali 105 from your last post do you mean the piece at the bottom of page 95? Thank you, Michael |
| Subject | : | RE:Shared designs |
| Author | : | Guido Imbimbo |
| Date | : | 02-11-2000 on 08:55 a.m. |
miaom@pacific.net.sg
Dear Daniel and Michael, Here is a pair of bagfaces that belong to my
friend Dante. The field of these bags have the same "trefoil" pattern that
appears in the Daniel post and in the Michael Wendorf Kurdish long rugs. I
believe these two bags are Kurdish. Sizes are 64x50 and 62x52 cm.   Finally, another example of Kurdish rug with "trefoil" design is
represented by plate 22 in the Dodds book on the Fisher collection.
Regards Guido |
| Subject | : | RE:Shared designs |
| Author | : | Patrick+Weiler |
| Date | : | 02-14-2000 on 10:09 a.m. |
jpweil00@gte.net This trefoil device is shown in a rug in the book
Tribal Rugs by Brian MacDonald on plate 146, p202. It is said to come from
the Nafar tribe of the Kamseh Confederacy, one of the three Turkic tribes
within the Kamseh. It is also the main device in a small Kamseh,  It contains some rather odd
creatures, extinct by now, I suspect. I call them Dr. Seuss animals;   and the back;  A
variation shows up in the main border of the Qashqai rug I admitted to
buying, shown in a salon about "Your First Time". The MacDonald reference
is the first I recall from the Nafar tribe. Is it credulous? The wool in
the rug above is very fine and the colors have a depth unfamiliar to me.
It very well could be from a tribe with a very small output, "different"
sheep and isolated dyers. Patrick Weiler |