Here's another Turkmen (Yomud group, I guess, but I'm not awfully confident about that) with some offset knots.

The little triangles in the border have them. The little triangles in the field don't (I think - I'm not terribly comfortable about whether I'm calling it correctly in a few places).

Here's a scan of part of the front:

This little fellow has red wefts and a fabulous palette.

Regards,

Steve Price

Oh! What a surprise! I wonder how many times I’ve looked past those borders, and simply not noticed offsets. When we compare this with the same border on the Yomut piece I posted on Pat’s Baluch thread, it’s quite clear why this weaver chose to make adjustments in the design diagonals. She avoided distorted horizontal borders, and made four borders that matched. Isn’t it strange that the other weaver used offset knotting the field, but then not in the border where it would also have made an immense difference? Strange.

If we can keep collecting such examples, I think there’s a very good chance that such practices will eventually have some significance in sorting out some surprising specialized groupings. To me, it seems that many very beautiful Yomut pieces have not gotten their due, as other more easily definable and smaller groups have been merchandised enthusiastically. Just wait until another specialized group emerges…so that folks need not try so desperately to cram miscellaneous pieces that don’t fit into “Eagle Gol” categories…

Many thanks! This is exactly what I was hoping for during this Salon discussion.

Best,
Marla

Nope. The little triangles include offset knotting at the tips that point horizontally in both the horizontal and vertical borders. The little triangles in the field have no offset knots.

Does this make sense to me? To you? To quote A.A. Milne's timeless prose, It's THE WAY THINGS ARE, I suppose.

Regards,

Steve Price