Home Page Discussion

Salon du Tapis d'Orient

The Salon du Tapis d'Orient is a moderated discussion group in the manner of the 19th century salon devoted to oriental rugs and textiles and all aspects of their appreciation. Please include your full name and e-mail address in your posting.

The “Tuning-Fork” Kurdish Rugs

by Guido Imbimbo and Daniel Deschuyteneer

The Kurdish Levi’s Rug

In a well known article published in the summer 1993 in Hali 70, Alberto Levi, the Italian dealer, introduced a number of Kurdish carpets that predate 1850 connecting them to the iconography of the Safavid garden carpets. Among them there was an unpublished rug (fig. 15 in the article, page 93) (1) that, in some way, was left out by the intense debate that followed the article. In this Salon we will discuss a group of rugs to which the Levi's rug belongs. We will take the opportunity to also present two of our recent acquisitions that may represent an interesting addition to this group.

1. The Levi Rug

The field of the Levi’s rug is characterized by a repeated floral design (2) that is developed along three vertical axes. According to the author this motif “resembles a tuning-fork”. He also believes that the vertical lines are derived “from the shape of the watercourses” that would "have been extrapolated from the early garden iconography" (Hali 70, p. 92). While we believe that actually the design may reflect a floral motive with calyx, stem and opened petals, for simplicity we will refer to it as “Tuning-Fork”(1).

2. The Tuning Fork Motif

In the field there are also some filler elements represented by multicolor and well-designed flowers. The color background of the field is a corroded brown that has been extensively restored. A floral tendril formed by three repeated elements (a round 8-petal flower, a small flower and a floral bud) represents the main border of the Levi's rug. We will refer to it as the "Bud and Flower" border. Finally, the two secondary borders are represented by the "running dog" design that is found in several other Kurdish rugs.

The “Tuning-Fork” Rugs Group

We found eleven pieces that present a field with the “tuning fork” device. These carpets can be subdivided in two subgroups, A and B (see Table 1) (2).

Group A

Group A is formed by five pieces (see Table 1). Beside the Levi’s rug there are two rugs that appeared in the international auction market and sold respectively at Phillips in 1987 (3) and at Skinner in 1995(3), and an unpublished small fragment (4). The fifth piece that belongs to Group A is a blue ground and narrow fragmentary rug that has appeared in the Internet market (5).

Table 1: "Tuning-Fork" Kurdish Rugs

Group A

Group B

(*) indicates reduced in length

3. The Phillips Tuning-Fork Rug

The design of fragment (4) is very similar to the Levi's rug but there are also some differences. While for both fragments the field is a deep indigo, the Levi's one is a heavy corroded brown. The field of the Phillips rug, according with the entry of the catalogue, is piled in natural camel hair. Fragment (4) is also significantly narrower than the other pieces that belong to group A.

4. A Tuning-Fork Rug Fragment

5. A Tuning-Fork Fragmented Rug (detail)

In summary, carpets in this group present the following features:

(i) The "Tuning-Fork" in the field is carefully designed and has a more naturalistic execution.

(ii) The "Bud and Flower" main border that is often associated with the oldest Kurdish carpets.

(iii) A flower represents the filling device in the field.

(iv) A quite fine weaving with high knots counting.

We believe that carpets in this group are older than those classified in Group B.

The "Bud & Flower" Border

The Levi rug and fragment (4) presents a border with a "bud and flower" device. This border is found also in a number of others old Kurdish rugs that have been dated between 1800 and 1850 (6 and Table 2)(4) .

Levi	Guido	Dodds	Nagel	ORACP197	SNY

6.The "Bud & Flower" Border

Note that the Kurdish rugs in Table 2 with the "Bud & Flower" motif have different field design varying from "flaming palmette" to "avshang" design and "multiple medallions" (5). Some of the rugs in Table 2 present also a secondary border with the traditional "running dog" design.

Table 2: Kurdish (?) rugs with "Bud & Flower" border

While the "Bud & Flower" borders in the Levi Rug and in fragment (4) are identical, the Phillips rug presents instead a different border seen (7) in other old Kurdish weavings associated with a “Stepped Diamond Lattice” field design(6). Also different in the Phillips rug are the secondary borders.

7. Phillips Rug Border

Group B

We found three published rugs that may fall in the Group B: Plate 11 in Eagleton (1988), a rug advertised in Hali (8), and a carpet that appeared in the international market (9)(7). To them we can add two Kurdish carpets appeared in the internet market and another unpublished piece (10) (see Table 1).

8. Boralevi Rug	9. Skinner Rug

10. Daniel's Rug

Rug (10) is the longest and largest of the Tuning-fork groups. This allows the field design to insert three vertical rows of “tuning-fork” instead of two. The color scheme is usual for this group. The color saturation in this rug varies from place to place especially among the greens that are a mixture of indigo and yellow (11).

As in the other rugs of the two groups white is used as highlights. The main border as well as the outer minor border contains alternating rosette (12). The minor border is a floral meandering. The structure analysis (Appendix 2) fits the Sauj Bulagh attribution.

11. Detail of Daniel's Rug	12. Borders of Daniel's Rug

Group B can be identified by the following elements:

(i) The “tuning-fork” motif has a more geometric rendition (13).

(ii) The filling device in the field resembles a sort of “cloudband collar”(14).

(iii) The design of the border tends to move away from the elegant “bud and flower” design that we find in older Kurdish rugs.

Guido	Levi	Phillips
Daniel	Boralevi	Skinner

13. ”Tuning-Fork” motif in Group A and Group B

Boralevi	Daniel	Skinner	Haliden

14. "Cloudband" Motif in Group B

The "Shikak" motif

The origin of the filling design (14) of Group B is uncertain. It could be another floral element (like the "bugs bunny" device of many NWP carpets) or recall the typical "cloudband" of Chinese origins. The "cloudband" element could be also associated to the "symmetrical cross" that is often found in several Kurdish weavings and that Eagleton attributes to the Shikak tribe of Iran (pp. 57-58 in his book; 8).

Michael Wendorf has briefly discussed the Shikak motif in Salon 88 in Turkotek. He believes that "its origins are in flatweaves, perhaps slit tapestry" and that the Shikak pieces "were probably woven by several groups in several places". Some of the weavings containing the Shikak cross are summarized in Table 3.

The "cloudband collar" design that we find in Tuning-Fork Kurdish carpets of Group B would simply represent "half" of the Shikak cross that appears in weavings like 16. This is actually the case in the Benardout and the Kailash mafrash. Note that the main border in the Bernardout and the Kailash mafrash is exactly the same as in Eagleton plate 12 and that the "S" horizontal border, also seen in Shasavan weavings, is exactly similar as the vertical main border of the Boralevi rug.

Picture (17) shows a "reconstruction" of the shikak motifs using the half "cloudband-shikak" filler motifs of the rug B5. The similarities are striking but the horizontal prongs of the original motif are missing.

15. Detail of Daniel's Rug	16. Kailash Mafrash	17. "Shikak" Motif Reconstruction

Table 3: Some Kurdish (?) Weavings with "Shikak" Motif

References

Ahlheim Ulrich, Seen But Not Kurd, in Hali Issue 97, March 1998, pp 67-69

Bamborough Philip, Antique Oriental Rugs and Carpets, 1979

Burns James D., The Caucasus Traditions in Weavings, 1987 Deschuyteneer Daniel, Kurdish North West Persian Rugs? in Salon du Tapis d'Orient, Turkotek website, December 1998

Deschuyteneer Daniel, Kurdish North West Persian Rugs? in Salon du Tapis d'Orient, Turkotek website, December 1998

Dodds Dennis R. and Murray L. Eiland Jr., Oriental Rug from Atlantic Collections, Philadelphia Eight ICOC Inc., 1996

Eagleton William, An Introduction to Kurdish Rugs, 1988

Eskenazi John, Il Tappeto Orientale, 1983

Izady Mehrdad R., The Kurds - A Concise Handbook, 1992

Levi Alberto, Hali Issue 70, Aug.-Sep. 1993, pp. 84-93

Stone Peter F. (Ed.), Mideast Meets Midwest, Ethnographic Rugs From Midwest Collections, The Chicago Rug Society, 1993

Appendix 1

Table 4: Some Kurdish(?) Rug Groups

Appendix 2: Technical Analysis

Daniel's Rug (B5 Table 1)

Size: 270cm x145cm

Structure analysis: Marla Mallett's "Woven Structure" nomenclature

Yarn spin: Z Knot: wool, 2 singles, symmetrical, H21/dm V36/dm 756/dm² (H5.5pi V9pi 50psi)

Pile height: 1cm - very glossy and silky wool

Warp: 2 ply wool - ivory and gray brown

Weft: brownish red wool, 2 singles, 2 or 3 picks, wefts are crossed between sheds

Interlaced selvage: 6 units (1,1,1,1,1,1) reinforced in two groups with red wool singles

End finishes: missing

Colors: very saturated and brilliant - Pinkish and brick reds- From medium to very dark saturated indigo blue- From apple green to dark blue green - gold yellow, orange- yellow, lemon yellow, white, medium brown and darker slightly corroded brown

Guido's Fragment (A3 Table 1)

Size: 96cm x 44cm (reduced in length)

Structure analysis: Marla Mallett's "Woven Structure" nomenclature

Yarn spin: Z Knot: symmetrical, 2 wool singles, V9pi H7pi 63psi

Pile height: Low

Warp: ivory or light brown, 2 plies wool

Weft: red wool single, two picks

Selvage: reinforced selvage

End finishes: missing

Colors: white, brown, pink, red, aubergine, black, light blue, dark blue, indigo, yellow, light green

Notes

1. The floral "Tuning-Fork" device resembles a more simplified "Trefoil" motif, often organized in a lattice scheme, that is found in others Persian weavings (see plate 295, ORAC or some carpets in the Wendorf exhibition in Washington).

2. The dates attributed to the rugs in Table 1, as well in the others tables in this Salon, reflect simply the attribution given in the reference source when available. It does not reflect our opinion. The only temporal attribution we have attempted here is in relative terms: we believe that rugs in Group A are older than those in Group B.

3. We have only a black and white picture for the Skinner piece. The entry says: "Northwest Persian Runner, mid 19th century, three columns of blossoming vines in red, sky blue, aubergine, gold, red-brown, ivory, and light blue-green on the midnight blue field, red square motif and rosette border, (reduced in length, borders missing from one end, small holes, crease)". This carpet is quite close to the Levi piece having the central column of the "tuning forks" in ivory. It presents the same filler motifs.

4. To this list of rugs with "bud and flower" border we may also add the North-West Persian carpet shown in Eskenazi [1983], plate 192, p. 290.

5. A wider list of Kurdish (?) rugs, organized by groups, is presented in Appendix 1.

6. See the Rochester Rug, the Wendorf Rug and the Levi Rug in the “Steeped Diamond Lattice” Group in Table 4 in Appendix 1. In the Wendorf's exhibition there was also another rug with the same border but with different field.

7. Thomas Baker reviewed this rug in Oriental Rug Review, Vol. 13/3: "Lot 178 was a very collectable Kurd rug with a field of ascending leaf and flower motifs. Somewhat crooked, it had outstanding wool and the best, clear and bright Kurdish colors you can find. A truly "inviting" rug, it was reasonably and astutely bid to $2,300"

8. Izady [1992] calls the "Shikak" motif a turtle design. Some scholars believe that the "Shikak" motif has strong slit tapestry weave roots.

Discussion

Home Page