Regards,
Marvin| Subject | : | Tent bands |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 02-17-2000 on 08:07 p.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear People, One of the more interesting kinds of weavings associated with Turkmen weddings hasn't been mentioned yet. That's the pile decorated (or, rarely, all pile) tentbands. These have an iconography completely different than other Turkmen textiles, use a type of knot that I believe is unique, are among the very few Turkmen items that have pile decoration on a flatwoven ground, and are usually only about 1 foot wide and up to 50 feet long, so they obviously aren't made on the same loom used to make bags and rugs. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | R. John Howe |
| Date | : | 02-18-2000 on 08:17 a.m. |
| Hi Steve - As part of your initiating post in this thread you wrote: ...These have an iconography completely different than other Turkmen textiles... It does often seem that this is the case when one looks at tent band designs but in a poster presentation at the 1996 ICOC, Soren Neergaard made precisely the reverse contention. Here is part of the opening portion of his text: ...The aim of this investigation is to demonstrate that many of the figures we find on tentbands have their parallels in the vast majority of Turkmen carpets and bags. The tentband figures either form a condensed version of the complete design of a carpet or bag or contain elements that have been used in carpets and bags. As demonstrated in my poster presentation at the 7th ICOC in Hamburg, many, if not all, Turkmen tentband figures seem to represent a tale from early Turkmen belief. This has now been extended to include Turkmen carpets and bags. Mr. Neergaard's 1996 poster presentation is included as the last article in the just published "Oriental Carpets and Textile Studies, Volume V, Part 1. It includes nine plates in which Mr. Neergaard offers multiple side-by-side comparisons of tentband designs and usages that seem parallel to him on carpets and bags. I could send you an image or two if that would be useful. Regards, R. John Howe |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | Marvin Amstey |
| Date | : | 02-18-2000 on 04:38 p.m. |
| mamstey1@rochester.rr.com Here is a scan of a tentband fragment that I
own showing an obvious Tauk Nauska motif, supporting John's comments: Regards,
Marvin |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | Yon Bard |
| Date | : | 02-18-2000 on 10:31 p.m. |
| I think nobody will dispute the obvious fact that many tent-band motifs also appear on 'regular' Turkoman weavings (the swerrated tree being perhaps the most common). The motifs do, however, often appear on the tent-bands in different, perhaps more elaborate, forms, or in unusual juxtapositions. In Marvin's example, for instance, the tauk-noska beasties appear not in the usual guls, but rather in what looks like something derived from a kepse gul. Regards, Yon |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | Marvin Amstey |
| Date | : | 02-19-2000 on 12:15 p.m. |
| mamstey1@rochester.rr.com Interesting, I never saw the similarity to a Kepsie gul. It just looked like terraces with pomegranate trees. Regards, Marvin |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | Stephen Louw |
| Date | : | 02-20-2000 on 12:02 p.m. |
| Although, as Marvin showed us, many Turkmen designs are reproduced in various ways on tent bands, I think the essence of John's point stands: they appear to introduce a number of non-"traditional;" design elements into the weaving repertoire -- look at the "fertility" story which Yon illustrated earlier -- and, according to John, use different knots and are woven on different looms. That intrigues me, and whilst this does not prove anything, would add weight to the idea that they were produced for special occasions and purposes, rather than the part-commercial, part-cultural, reasons that governed other Turkmen production. Another interesting point -- for me anyway -- is the extent to which the designs used on tent bands have deteriorated in the 20th century, even more so on other weavings. Perhaps John can fill us in on some of the different knots used. Stephen |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | Christoph+Huber |
| Date | : | 02-20-2000 on 02:04 p.m. |
| huber-ch@pilatusnet.ch Dear Stephen To my knowledge white ground tentbands share their structure with a part of the Djulkhirs – what makes the whole thing even more interesting to me. You refer to some of the ornaments used on tentbands as non-"traditional". I likewise have the feeling that these ornaments reflect an other “layer” of the design-tradition, but to me they seem (at least at the moment – this is another working-hypothesis of mine...) to be more-traditional, more-tribal than many of the other ornaments which are possibly more “urban” in origin than we are aware of. Regards, Christoph |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | Stephen Louw |
| Date | : | 02-20-2000 on 02:12 p.m. |
| Dear Christoph Thanks for the comment. Perhaps you can share with us a bit about the traditional structure of the Djulkhirs. Also you sugest some of the designs are more tribal. My concern with the word tribal here is that it seems to be used to imply less commercial, or less influenced by cosmopolitain (urban) settlement. An endogenous rather than exogenous design. If that is your point, I agree. My term non-traditional is (on reflection) a bad one. What I meant was simply, not-common, or less-common than we are used to. In particular, many of the figures and characters used seem not only to parallel some SW Persian figures and characters, but are also used to tell a "story" in a way that is not usually found in the "more common" largely geometric arrangements used by Turkmen weavers. In this sense, we might indeed be dealing with a "rug" woven for a special occasion, or indeed, a "dowry piece". Stephen |
| Subject | : | RE:What about tent bands? |
| Author | : | Christoph+Huber |
| Date | : | 02-20-2000 on 05:05 p.m. |
| huber-ch@pilatusnet.ch Dear Stephen On Fig. 65 in ‘Carpets of the Peoples of Central Asia’ you can see the back of an “offset” knotted Julkhir. The pattern is hardly visible on the back just as in the case of the tent bands. On page 84 a short description of the technique is given and footnote 137 says that it is identical with the one certain Yomud and Tekke tent bands were produced. Only after rather recently having discovered the two images on Marla’s website http://www.marlamallett.com/up-two.htm dealing with tent bands I got a little bit a clearer concept of how these weavings were made. What puzzles me a little bit is the fact that the these two groups of weavings which share this odd structure have to my eyes a rather different appearance. Or said the other way round: I wouldn’t have expected that one would choose the same technique to produce these different looking weavings, if there are others easily available. A lot of questions about of the relations between a technique and the tribes which uses it arises here and I think there are not many answers yet. Does for example the common structure of Julkhirs and tent bands imply a common origin? And if the answer were yes what would this mean? Regards, Christoph |