Richard Larkin

Hi Dinie,

Thanks for bringing us this interesting salon. I am not familiar with the Parsons book, so it is very informative for me.

One thing that strikes me about this grouping is it appears to constitute a collection of post 1900 weavings, presumably dated reliably, that can be referred to for comparison with other weavings in order to estimate age. There are various features about several of the pieces, in terms of color, design, finish, etc., that I tend to apply as rules of thumb to estimate the ages of weavings, though I don't have proven bases for comparison. It is mostly educated guesswork, proceeding upon an an analysis that assumes certain usages must have crept in after other earlier usages, etc. These rugs provide a useful frame of reference for that sort of assessment.

A related consideration is that knowledgeable persons of the region have deemed these pieces suitable to be set aside as special exemplars of the period. In fact, though most of the rugs are later than what most collectors are seeking, they exhibit a level of quality that supports the judgment. Other rugs can be found comparable to the ones shown in terms of apparent palette, design and structure, but lacking the aesthetic merit of these ones. What is clear is that over a few weaving generations, say from the mid to later nineteenth century to the early/mid twentieth century, distinct changes occurred in the weaving practices and output of the region. We don't precisely know how that evolved, but we can see the results. For example, some of the pieces have a reminiscent "Beshir" flavor about them, though they're decidedly different from the old Beshirs. One sees in this collection that though the the product changed, the newer rugs could have merit on their own terms.

I agree with your choice of the two piece "Farah" carpet as the best of the lot. I don't recall having seen one of those sewn up examples that I would think was older than this one. The quality of the colors and their combination here are excellent.

Rich Larkin

Steve Price

Hi Rich

I agree. The collector neurosis with which we're familiar shies away from 20th century weavings, although the best of them can be very beautiful and with excellent materials and workmanship. I would add that the world of 20th century rugs is a much less uncertain place than that of antiques. Dealers actually knew when and where the stuff they were selling was woven. Depending on how someone feels about immersion in fantasy, this can be seen as an advantage or as a disadvantage.

Regards

Steve Price

Rich Larkin

Hi Dinie, et al,

Following is a large (ca. 9' x 12') rug I have that looks to be a close cousin to the last two images in your salon array, not labeled.



Pardon my images, which were taken at midday in very bright summer sun. I was standing on a high ledge, and counted the experience as an overall success, not having fallen off. The folds reflect extended attic residence. In real life under incandescent light, the rug has a rather nice chestnut hue. It isn't too far in its "look" from the full shot image in your salon, and has obvious other features in common with that one as well.

I've posted it because I think I have a pretty good idea of the age. I purchased it in the 1970's from an Armenian-American family business that had been in the town in which I grew up for most of the twentieth century. The eldest brother, "Doc," who was about 75 when I bought it, told me it had been in use in the family home for most of his life, which I believed. He said it was about eighty years old then. For what that's worth (I had a lot of confidence in Doc's credibility), I thought the rug might provide a useful frame of reference here.

I don't have a very firm grasp of the nomenclature for large "Ersari" type rugs from the early twentieth century forward, with the oversized "gulli gul," the "temirdjen gul" etc. The terms, "Labijar," "Saltuq," "Taghan," and such, are commonly used. Does Parsons' book explain it effectively? Are the attributions made on design grounds? Structural grounds? Palette?

Rich Larkin

Joel Greifinger

Hi Dinie and Rich,

I hope no one minds if I piggyback this Ersari carpet onto Rich's. It's about the same size, but there are fewer, larger guls. I've seen these called either temirjin or omurga guls.

Since I know so little about these, I've got lots of questions. Rich mentions the "chestnut hue" of his carpet. The background color here is brick. Does this provide any reliable clues? Are these secondary guls (seemingly a version of dyrnak gul) a common feature in Ersari main carpets? I'm guessing this piece is from the same period as Rich's (early 20th century?), but I have nothing nearly as reinforcing as Doc's autobiographical testimony. Any and all additional information would be appreciated.






And Dinie, thanks for sharing this exhibition with us.

Joel Greifinger

Paul Smith

Hello, all--

I am curious about the strong yellow that appears in many early 20th-century "Afghan" "Ersari" weavings. I'm not sure if I see it in Rich's and Joel's main carpets here, but perhaps I do. On my screen those yellows look like the older pale yellow variety, though. Example 39b in the Salon, the ensi-looking piece (called a "purdah"), has it, though. Dated to the 1920s, I noticed that a lot of the colors look very nice, and the ground color looks very similar to my little rug below--

I suspect my little rug is early 20th-century, though I would think earlier than 1920 perhaps. It has a band of embroidered knots in apparently-Ponceau orange at just one flatwoven end, with perfectly fine reds elsewhere (sigh...). You can see the strong yellow, though, looking exactly like the close-ups of the yellow in 39b, as well as the last unnumbered main carpet in the Salon. These weavers seem to blend it effectively with blues for some nice greens (as in Joel's last image), but I wonder if it's a synthetic or not. I have seen spectacular yellows in far-earlier Middle Amu Darya weavings, but I don't think this is that yellow.

Paul

Joel Greifinger

Hi Paul,

The yellow in my rug is different from the hue in 39b or in your piece. Here it is in context of the other colors (in the lower left quadrant) as compared with 39b from the salon.



Joel Greifinger

Paul Smith

Hi Joel--I agree, that's the older yellow I was thinking of. On the whole I would think that your rug is from an earlier generation than the ones in the Salon, but I have no authority whatsoever. That is a very attractive green there! Paul

Dinie Gootjes

Hi All,

Great to see some Afghans coming out of the woodwork over the weekend.

Rich, the book explains all terms effectively and in great detail. So much so that at first the book, though very interesting, left me with a major headache: so many towns, villages, tribes, sub-tribes, motifs, characteristics etc. Once you grasp the structure of the book, things become somewhat clearer, though still the quantity of information is overwhelming. After the first few introductory chapters the book is set up to reflect a rug buying trip through Afghanistan from east to west. All the major rug markets are described, with the types of rugs that are traded in each. Past and present production is described, with the characteristics of each separate area, village or tribe. Attributions are made on grounds of structure, palette, designs, kind of wool used, whatever the author saw as distinctive. The more of these rugs the reader has seen and handled, the more he will profit from the book. There I have a big disadvantage. But the general information about life in Afghanistan, but also about the different breeds of sheep, the dye stuffs and the dyeing process, the preparation of the wool etc. make the book very readable even for a relative beginner.

Nice large rugs, Rich and Joel. Interesting how different the colours are. I am not going to try to make attributions for your rugs. The guls are often typical for a certain group, as are colours, but structure also plays a large part. Several rugs are shown in the book where design features are typical of one group, but the rug is assigned to another on the basis of structural characteristics. Buy the book and go at it
By the way, Parsons mentions that a warm brown field colour is often achieved by mixing madder and walnut. He also mentions that the majority of the older Karaboiin production has oxidised into "lovely shades of rich browns"... Take your pick.
A quick browse through the book does not show any dyrnak type guls as secondary element as in your carpet, Joel. It does occur in a Karaboiin purdah (Afghan term for ensi) and it is mentioned as associated with the Ersari sub clans of the Karaboiinn and Chakesh, and with the Yamout. But their carpets do not seem to look like yours.

The yellow will have to wait till tomorrow.

Dinie

Steve Price

Hi Dinie

Parsons' book is the perfect example of how much reliable detail there is for attribution of rugs woven since about 1875. Buyers and dealers knew their sources and often recorded them. Unfortunately, too many people believe that similarly reliable information exists (or can be inferred) for rugs woven earlier, even centuries earlier.

I should add, your reaction to the geographical detail is pretty much the same as mine. It's a lot of data, but with little useful information and no real "take home message". The broader context into which the piece fits is interesting, of course.

Regards

Steve Price

Rich Larkin

Hi all,

Paul, you put your finger on an issue that needs explanation: the range of yellows in these groups of rugs. There's no doubt that a very strong version tends to show up in later pieces. This is true of Baluch, too. Looking at the literature, it seems that there are numerous sources of natural yellow in use among the weavers, probably more so than any other color. It's also true that the strength or intensity of a color is a function of the mordants used, or other aspects of the dyeing process. It may be that apparent shifts in typical color values among known weaving groups reflected changes in where they sourced their dyeing (from centralized sources), rather than changes in the dyestuffs themselves. Fortunately, Dinie promised to straighten out the yellow question, and we're all waiting.

Joel, The darker blue in your rug (e. g., the quarter sections within the guls) seems to have a slightly purplish tint. Is that so? Subject to that phenomenon, it seems to feature an older selection of colors than other rugs of its ilk. I assume that the ca. 9 x 12 size in these generally Ersari types signals a production intended for western markets, as contrasted with smaller, more traditional main carpet sizes from these weavers.

Incidentally, Paul, I would judge the yellow in the rug I posted to fall about in the middle of the range of intensity you are apt to find. Burrowing into the knots discloses a shade slightly towards mustard, but that is probably true of a lot of yellows that appear paler on the pile surface.

BTW, Dinie, where did Parsons find the name, Karaboiin? Didn't he know we were already choking on the names we had?

Rich Larkin

Dinie Gootjes

Hi All,

No problem, Rich. The description with item 39b, the purdah with the strong yellow, reads:"... Flecks of gold (from the sparak flower)..."

Just for fun, on p. 34 it says: "Sparak is the Uzbek name used in Afghan Turkestan for a wild flower which grows on the steppes and is particularly abundant around Maimana. It is also known as zahr-i-choub, 'yellow wood'. From afar, sparak resembles ragwort (Senecio Jacobea) and, like ragwort, it is also poisonous to catttle. The florettes of this plant are collected in April and May and left to dry, then ground into powder. The mordants and general dyeing process are the same as described above (for madder DG), except that less sparak dye is required and the yarn must steep for five to ten days longer in the mordant."

But you are right, Paul, the yellow in this rug was far stronger and more of a golden tone than the other yellows. As Rich says, it might reflect differences in the dyeing process or origin of the dye stuffs. After a lot of googling, I am now 99% sure that sparak=isparak= Delphinium zalil, the yellow larkspur. By the way, from afar it may resemble Senecio, but close up it resembles nothing so much as, gasp, a yellow larkspur.
D. zalil is the plant Pierre Galafassi mentions in his TT Salon on dyes as a possible source of a natural bright golden yellow:

http://www.turkotek.com/salon_00129/salon.html

So it could be natural, I guess. Which is different from saying it is. It is funny that in both the rug from the exhibition and Paul's rug it occurs in combination with that wine red, so different from the usual 'variations on a brick'. Is that kind of red known from natural sources in Afghan rugs?

As for the Karaboiin, Rich, Parsons got that out of the same grab bag that contains your Sauj Bulagh.

Dinie

Michael Raysson

People are certainly welcome to buy or collect rugs from any era they want and it is understandable that many people may like modern rugs. However, to label those with a predilection for old, antique, archaic, or archtypal rugs which were made prior to the twentieth century, and are not attracted to later rugs as having a "collector neurosis" is a careless thought at best.

I will not go into a long dissertation upon why those of us who are attracted solely to old, antique or ancient rugs are so disposed or even why I, myself, am. I will merely say that the reasons for being so are profound and not neurotic.

Michael Raysson

Paul Smith

Michael--

As someone who shares aspects of your affliction, I could say that perceiving the reasons for the affliction as being profound could be part of the neurosis. Neurosis and profundity are not mutually exclusive, and creative applications of neurosis are not necessarily bad...

Paul

Steve Price

Hi Michael

I'm sensing that my remark offended. If so, I apologize. It wasn't intended to single out those who collect antique rugs, but refers to collectors in general. I don't see it as a serious condition - that is, most of us are able to conduct relatively normal lives while feeding it.

Psychologists don't appear to be unanimous, but at least some see collecting as a (usually mild) form of obsessive-compulsive behavior. Most of us cause little harm to anyone while indulging our neurosis, and the mental exercise it gives us may actually be useful as well as pleasant.

Regards.

Steve Price

Michael Raysson

Dear Steve,

It isn't personal. However, I do believe your remark was specific to oriental rug collectors who will not buy rugs made after a certain date or time. The inference being obviously that there are beautiful rugs being made after that date or time and these people are so neurotic (or somewhat neurotic) about buying rugs of a certain time before that, that they are prevented from appreciating (and collecting) later rugs.

That being a general statement, I made a general answer. My answer is predicated on the fact that there are profound (and healthy) reasons to choose to collect only old, antique, ancient and archetypal rugs.

I understand that there is a feeling among some that collecting in general tends to be neurotic. There may be some truth if one is just collecting to collect. For me, there is a big difference, however in collecting to collect and collecting profound objects such as Oriental rugs, especially older ones. That is why I made a point about collecting these old and ancients works of art.

Michael Raysson

Dear Paul,

My dictionary defines affliction as a condition of pain suffering or distress. My experience with rugs is one of awe, wonder, mystery and happiness.

Steve Price

Hi Michael

Every collector is a collector of some genre of things, usually things that he can't use to meet some necessity (food, shelter, clothing, for example). There are collectors of postage stamps, playing cards, autographs, antique weapons, butterflies, old maps, limericks, various subcategories of rugs and textiles, and the list could go go on and on. One psychological school of thought is that each of them is a specific manifestation of "collector neurosis". I don't doubt for a moment that selection of the genre isn't the neurotic element and is probably constructive for many collectors.

Incidentally, one of our early Salons (nearly 11 years ago) was devoted to the question of why collectors collect what they do. Here's a link to it.

Regards

Steve Price

Pierre Galafassi

Hi Dinie,
I believe that you are 110% right:
If we except Encyclopedia Persica, which identifies «esparak» as being weld (Reseda lutea), most experts and explorers of central Asia, Iran and Afghanistan have mentioned the major source of yellow for wool as being Persian- or Turkoman Larkspur, alias Delphinium zalil:
Boehmer (1) calls it Asbarg or Persian larkspur and states that it is the most frequently identified yellow in old Persian and Afghan carpets.
Mushak (2,3,4) called it isparyk, Delphinium sulfurium, sachirob or Turkoman variety of larkspur, identified it by HPLC in various central Asian carpets from Yarkand to Caspian sea, stated that Reseda Lutea was not used in early rugs in this area (Note: Reseda L. was however ubiquitous in classical Anatolian rugs (5)) and seems to imply that only more recent Turkoman rugs (late XIX-early XX century?) were sometimes using (imported) Reseda L..
V.G. Moshkova (6) mentions zalil as the major source of yellow for Turkoman- («sari chop»), Uzbek- and Kirgiz («isparak) weavers.
Burnes, who visited Bokhara, the Ersaris (Amu darya), Saryks (northern Merv oasis), Salors (Sharak on the Tejen river) and Goklens (on the lower Gurgien- and Attarek rivers) in 1831-1832, mentions the flower as one of the few commercial dyes in bazaars: «...There is a small yellow flower, called «esbaruk» growing in the low hills near Kurshee and Balkh, which is used as a dye, and produces a better colour than the rind of the pomegranate....».
Last, but not least, my friend Marc Roy states that zalil, still today, is a popular natural yellow in Afghanistan. As an owner of several rugs containing zalil yellow, I can confirm that it can deliver saturated and bright (warm) golden yellows. I would not be surprised to hear that zalil has been defamed as being an "anilin" dye by some unlucky experts. I suppose that the Turkoman use of the dye in pale (egg-shell-) shades only (except Beshir) was purely an aesthetic preference.
Best regards
Pierre

H. Boehmer. Koekboya. Page 185.
P. Mushak. A rare «jewelry» asmalyk. Stylistic and technical analysis. Oriental Rug Review, Vol 8/2, December/january 1988.
P. Mushak. Dye analysis in miscellaneous rugs of the central Asian group. Oriental Rug Review, Vol 11/6.
P. Mushak. Selected dye analysis in two old saryk main carpets.
F. Batari. Ottoman Turkish Carpets. Page 12-13
(6) V.G. Moshkova Chapter 6. Page 35.
(7) A. Burnes. Travels into Bokhara. Vol. 2. Page 167

Rich Larkin

Hi Pierre,

I believe you are 110% THE MAN! This is excellent information. Do you happen to know whether Burnes wrote about the weaving practices of those groups? Excuse me if you have written about this before.

Rich Larkin

Pierre Galafassi

Hi Rich,
It looks as if you have got a discount price for flowers!

Yeah, it would have been a ruggies’ dream, but I must disappoint you, sorry: neither Mouraviev, nor Burnes, nor O’Donovan (in my humble opinion the three most interesting travelers between 1820 and 1880), had any particular interest for rugs, even though all three had an outstanding talent for observation, as competent spies should have. The latter one was (officially) the correspondent of the British «Daily News» covering the Russian attack on the Akhal Teke stronghold, the other two were soldiers on fact-finding missions. Their reports are good reading for anybody interested in history, ethnology and sociology of the Turkomans. Then, both Britons had a ...well,.. British sense of humor. There is even an interesting mention of London’s peep shows.(Not kidding).

A ruggie must give himself satisfied with only a few little shots of his favorite drug:
For example in O’Donovan’s report:

Page 115, Book I: The skull of the wild desert sheep, with its enormous curled horns, the usual Turkoman sepulchral ornament....
Question: are these the same horns as those so prominent on top of Ersari & Beshir namazlik «prayer rugs»? Are they truly prayer rugs? O'Donovan assures his readers that the huge horns were in no way related with the behavior of Turkoman ladies and he should know.

Page 225. Book I and Page 347 Book II : «...a visitor draws aside the carpet which hangs curtain-wise before the door (of the kibitka)»...«...Then the carpet which hung curtain-wise before it was trust aside...»
Question: A clear allusion to an ensi? Please note that O’Donovan gives a very precise description of the making of a felt mat and has watched for months the young ladies of the yurt weaving carpets. He systematically mentions whether a rug is made of felt or woven. He does indeed speak of pile rugs here.

Page 178. Book II: «...special carpets of small sizes were immediately laid for Baba khan (Note: khan of the Tokhatamish Tekes of Merv) and myself close to the lattice...»
I remember a rather animated discussion in Turkotek on the possible use of small rugs. This could be a useful information.

Page 415. Book II. Turkomans have a peculiar way of looking and interpreting a design, «forgetting what I may call the positive design, the intervals between the objects delineated striking the eye more than the objects themselves»....
That rings a bell, doesn’t it?

In Burnes’ report:
Page 58. Book II: «......The Turkomans have no mosques; they say their prayers in the tent or in the desert, without ablution, and without a carpet. They have few Moollahs or priests, for the church has little honour among them, and they are but poor followers of the prophet.....».
This total absence of prayer rugs, even among the Ersaris is confirmed by O’Donovan. Even the back of a horse or of a camel is a perfectly legitimate place for the prayer. Who were then the customers who ordered the beautiful Ersari- or Beshir namazliks? Indian- or Persian Bokhara merchants, or the Uzbek leadership? Hardly Turkomans. Or were namazliks woven for another use? Or had Ersari weaver nothing to do with these rugs, after all?

Page 59-60. Book II: A Salor’s yurt at Sharacks (on the Tejen river) in 1831. «.... I was very agreeably surprised to find these wandering people living here, at least, in luxury. The tent or khirgah was spacious, and had a diameter of about twenty-five feet. The sides were of lattice-work, and the roof was formed of laths, which branched from a circular hoop, about three feet in diameter, through which the light is admitted. The floor was spread with felt and carpets, of the richest manufacture, which looked like velvet.
Fringed carpets were also hung up round the tent, which gave it a great finish, and their beauty was no doubt enhanced by their being the work of wives and daughters.
On one side of the tent was a small press, in which the females of the family kept their clothes, and above it were piled the quilts on which they slept. These are of variegated coloured cloth, both silk and cotton. From the circular aperture in the roof, three large tassels of silk were suspended, differing in colour, and neatly wrought by some fair young hand...»
O’ Donovan too describes a few yurts, for example page 140-141. Book II
«...the furniture of an ev is very simple. The fire occupies its middle, immediately under the center opening of the dome. The half of the floor remote from the entrance is covered with a ketché, or felt carpet, nearly an inch in thickness. On this are laid, Turkoman carpets, six or seven feet long by four to five in breadth, on which the inhabitants sit by day and sleep by night. A special bed is unknown to a Turkoman. The semi circle next the door is of bare earth, and on it chopping of wood, cooking and other rough domestic operations are conducted. Round the wall hang large flat camel bags six feet by four (!?! slip of the, pen?), one side being entirely composed of the rich carpet work in which the Turkoman excel. Ordinarily, all the household goods are packed in these bags, for transit from place to place on the back of camels. When empty they form a picturesque tapestry....«Toonik» , lamb or goat skins, the neck kept open by crossed sticks, hang under the roof and swing to and fro in the air draft produced by the fire...»

There is unanimity among all three authors about the way of life of the Turkomans. With exception of a portion of the Amu darya Ersari and a minority of Yomud near Khiva, all other Turkomans were still nomads, until the Russian conquest. There was not a single town settled by them. «Merv-city» was destroyed by the king of Bokhara around 1785 and the oasis was still a cluster of yurt villages in 1884. «Allaman» (slave hunting), horses, green tea, melted sheep tail fat (Turkoman haute cuisine) and idleness were still their idea of Allah’s paradise. Selling carpet was much more the exception than the rule. In none of the many bazaars visited and described in detail by our spies did they mention a carpet shop. Horses and carpets were kept in the family, offered as expensive gifts, stolen in raids on other tribes but apparently very rarely sold.

A last point to please our hard working Steve: The authors signal huge herds of Turkoman camels all over the place. In particular O’Donovan met a sea of these smiling beasts between the Atterek and Gurgien rivers (South East of the Caspian in Yomud and Göklen territory) and Burnes was impressed by a huge herd North of Merv (Saryk tribe). Apparently an expert launched an ukase to the effect that «Turkoman tribes did not raise camels». And the amazlik where woven to keep TV sets from desert dust.

Best regards
Pierre

Steve Price

Hi Pierre

The Turkmen/camels thing was a self-proclaimed "expert" showing the world how much he knew by ridiculing the Sotheby's Spring 2005 sale catalog. The catalog described a piece as a Salor camel trapping. The "expert" wrote,
We find it amusing and ignorant on the rug department’s part to call it a “camel trapping” in the catalog, as the Turkmen had no camels and even if they did how would a large “bag” or panel with a horizontal design like this been used or displayed on one? (emphasis in the original)

What's astonishing is the certainty with which this was presented despite Turkmen having camels being so well documented (they even appear on some tentbands), and the technology for displaying them on a camel requiring nothing more sophisticated than rope.

Regards

Steve Price

Rich Larkin

Hi Michael,

You said,

I'm inclined to agree. I would be interested to hear you elaborate on what those profound and healthy reasons might be in your opinion. In that regard, there is an interesting archived thread John Howe set up a few years ago, illustrating an analogous perspective from a different era.

http://www.turkotek.com/misc_00051/1910_aesthetics.htm

I think the comparison of the rugs in Dinie's thread (and their contemporaries) with older specimens on aesthetic grounds is within the scope of this thread.

Rich Larkin

Julia Watson

Going back to a couple of earlier posts: as a dyer I do know that some natural yellows derived from fresh flowers, leaves, stems (such as Goldenrod) will yield a clearer yellow than dyes made from the dried material. The latter tends more towards gold.

Steve Price

Hi Rich

The comparisons would be interesting and informative, certainly not beyond the scope of this thread. But it might be easier to follow if it became the subject of a new thread. The more directions a thread takes, the more difficult it becomes for folks to follow what's going on.

Regards

Steve Price

Joel Greifinger

Hi Folks,

In line with pursuing the period comparisons (in whatever thread is deemed appropriate), I wonder if some might follow up on Paul's earlier comment on the rug I posted:

Since we have already seen that one can be 110% right, it should be no problem for me to assert that I have less than no authority on the question of whether the rug has characteristics more often attributed to those widely held to be from an earlier generation. A discussion that highlighted such 'generational' differences on aesthetic (as well as other) grounds would be both interesting and informative.

Joel Greifinger

Richard Larkin

Hi Joel,

I meant to imply in my earlier comment that the 9 x 12 (and larger) size range that can be found in these Afghan rugs with apparently Ersari roots tends to mark a certain degree of lateness. I don't have solid evidence for the proposition, and can't say authoritatively how late.

Rich Larkin

Joel Greifinger

Hi Rich,

My bad. Having now actually measured, my rug is 116"x 93" (9'8"x 7'9" or 294 x 236cm). A quick glance at both Pinner and Jourdan turn up examples of Ersari main carpets in this size range (and even a bit bigger) attributed to the nineteenth century.

Sorry for the misleading clue.

Joel Greifinger

Dinie Gootjes

Hi Joel and Rich,

At the time of the opening of the exhibition Ms. Nekrassova mentioned that to us these large size carpets look too large to have been made for use in a tent. But these tents had a diameter of 6 meters or so, more than enough room for rugs like these. She further said that these rugs were often used outside the tent to welcome guests. Shir Paiwand describes the ones from the exhibition as from around 1850.

Dinie

Joel Greifinger

Folks,

In regards to Ersari main carpets, I have read or heard a number of aesthetic characteristics linked to older age: spaciousness (less "clutter"), number of borders (fewer), number of colors (greater), use of white (yes), background shade (various and contradictory).

Whether or not these are always actual markers of age, are they elements of what is widely taken to be more beautiful in the rugs of this type that are believed to be "old, antique, ancient and archetypal"?

If I followed Doc's story, Rich believes his example is about 100 years old. Now Dinie has relayed Shir Paiwand's assessment that its "close cousins" are from around 1850. I'm hoping some folks will elaborate their criteria for the perceived "generational" aesthetic shifts in this genre.

Joel Greifinger

James Blanchard

Hi all,

I've never fully understood the assertion that larger carpets are incompatible with earlier dates because they can't fit in a tent. Much business and recreation appears to have been conducted on large carpets outdoors (clan meetings, etc.). I am sure that many Turkotekkers have seen old pictures from the late 19th and early 20th century wherein various groups of Turkmen leaders are seated on large carpets for meetings or entertainment. Even older miniatures depict the same practice.

I suppose that the loom size might be another constraint for nomadic groups, but there are some fairly large and very fine Tekke main carpets that seem to be pretty old...

James

Paul Smith

Joel, James, et al--

I wouldn't take anything I would say about date attribution too seriously. My comparison of your carpet and the ones at the end of the Salon was based on a color I saw in the border of the last one that seemed a bit pinkish on the back and browner on the front, and the generally plain drawing I saw in those examples. And of course I liked yours and Rich's carpets more than those in the exhibition, so they have to be older, right?

I am anticipating a few raised eyebrows about the circa 1850 dating for those main carpets in the Salon, though. They sure look closer to 1910 to me, for the vague reasons I gave earlier. I think they fit beautifully into the 20th-century focus of this thread.

On large carpets...Those fabulous old Salor main carpets can get pretty big...

Paul

James Blanchard

Hi all,

I think that we need to consider a different chronology for "Afghan" carpets than we use for "Turkmen" carpets per se.

The first question would seem to be: "when did carpet weaving begin in Afghanistan"? I don't know the answer to that question, but if began in the mid-19th century or earlier then we would need to consider a chronology specific to Afghan carpets, and not simply tack them on to the end of a continuum of "Ersari" carpets from Turkmenistan. Can we consider the possibility that in the mid- to late 19th century that there was a parallel weaving traditions evolving in Afghanistan? If so, then I am not sure we need to force all of these "Afghan" rugs into the 20th century. If, instead, we assume that the Afghan carpet making began at the tail end of previous weaving traditions in Turkmenistan, then it makes sense to assign them to a later era. But I am not sure how satisfactory that is. To me, there are some substantial design and aesthetic differences between the two groups.

James

Richard Larkin

Hi Joel,

I don't mean to try to cash in the credentials of my late friend, Doc, too aggressively here. I understand that on TurkoTek, he's just another pretty face. But my relationship with him was such that I was confident his statements about the Afghan were just in the way of conversation about family matters, and not meant as sales talk. On that basis, to clarify the point, he was telling me that the rug had been family furnishing for many years, and that in the early/mid 1970's, it was about eighty years old. If accurate, that would put it somewhere shortly before 1900. It seems plausible now, and is a decent, if tentative, frame of reference.

My comment about the larger rugs being later is based on having seen very many specifically Ersari/Afghan types ("elephant's foot Bokharas" in the parlance of some retail venues), that seemed latish for a variety of reasons, in sizes that I took to be popular for western furnishings. Nine by twelve (mine) is right at the heart of that group. I agree that there were plenty of oversized rugs produced for quasi-local consumption, often being multiples of the length over the width. I suspect that many of these were made in local workshops. I've seen many of the photos to which James alluded that posed impressive looking personages of the region before such rugs. Many of them (the rugs) go under the rubric, "Beshir;" but many more feature a particular palette of dark liverish red, mid blue, ivory, yellow accents, that may be from a different matrix than the typical Beshir, or perhaps a different ty[pe of Beshir. Although I have not a shred of admissible evidence for the proposition, I assume for practical purposes that 7' x 15' Beshirs were woven in workshops of the region; and that 6.5' x 8' main rugs in fabulous madder with spectacular large guls, well spaced, with green and yellow to die for, were woven in the tents. BTW, I don't happen to own one.

I'm with Paul on the thought that 1850 seems very optimistic for the age of the last two examples in Dinie's salon.

Rich Larkin

James Blanchard

Hi all,

I have shown this carpet before, but think it is an appropriate example for this thread. I purchased it a few years ago in Pakistan on behalf of my brother-in-law.

In some respects, I find it a "special" carpet. It has wool of a density, length and luxuriousness that I have not seen on any other rug or carpet. The blues and greens are nothing short of remarkable.

I can't really guess at an age. The dealer suggested "late 19th century", and felt that it was among the older "Labijar" carpets he had handled. He based this primarily on the quality of the wool, dyes and the variability in the secondary design elements in the field. I have seen many later "Afghan" main carpets and none approach this one, so I am inclined to think it pre-dates the later groups. I actually think that it has much in common with Rich's example, so perhaps "late 19th" is not a bad estimate.

For what it's worth, it has a "buttery" yellow in the pile and in the kilim ends.

All I know for sure is that I wish it were mine....

James

Dinie Gootjes

Hi All,

Wow, James, that is some carpet. That wool just gleams. That must have been a hard one to buy for somebody else, related or not.

Rich, are those pictures you are alluding to from the end 19th/beginning 20th century? How do you then know the colours?

Dinie

Rich Larkin

Hi Dinie,

Sorry. That was a bit opaque. I meant that I have seen many black and white pictures of the rugs taken ca. 1880-1900; and I have seen many actual rugs that were obviously similar to those in the pictures. I will try to post a few examples if I can find them in the next few days. Werner Loges, for one, has some interesting remarks on the merger of Ersari weaving into Afghan weaving, with a few plates.

James, that is a very extravagant rug. Interestingly, it could be said to feature the liver-red, etc., color palette I mentioned above, though I was hardly thinking of a rug like that one. The Afghan I posted in panel #3 of this thread is not so bad in the glossy wool department, but it is by no means in the league of the rug your brother-in-law owns. Speaking of brothers-in-law, that's quite the brother-in-law he has! We all should have such a one.

Rich Larkin

Marvin Amstey

'afternoon James.
Is the glossy wool on your brother-in-law's rug naturally occurring or the result of chemical washing? Has anyone picked out a whole knot to see if the sheen is uniform?
Marvin

James Blanchard

Hi Marvin,

I have seen lots of the chemically washed rugs from Pakistan and Afghanistan, and this one does not strike me as being in that category. It has long and thick pile, but the wool does seem to be quite fine. I haven't picked a knot to look all the way through, but despite its great condition, the rug does give a sense of some age (at least to several decades old). But I suppose I could be wrong.

Here is another photo that depicts the great blues and greens and the "chestnut" ground that Rich referenced earlier.

James

Chuck Wagner

James, Marvin, et al,

In this case I think the construction technique contributes to the glossy appearance. If I am the second photo correctly, the pile is quite long and there is probably a wide weft pass between each knot. In such cases, the tufts of wool lie flat atop the next lower line of knots and the sides of the wool strands are exposed for several mm, rather than being densely packed and standing more or less upright, as one would see with a shorter clip.

I have a couple rugs with this appearance, that is not (in my opinion)caused by a chemical wash like some Khal Mohammadi rugs. The first is not quite as glossy as the second; it is also an Ersari that was shown in an old thread on dyes and ethnographic value:









I'll post some images of the other after I take a couple pics.

And Steve, my personal experiences with Dick Parsons were always punctuated with plenty of caution; I don't think he was a willing participant in many of the typical rug business naming games. He was in fact quite complimentary of George O'Bannons imaginative capabilities, in that regard.

Karaboiin is also Qara Boyen and is more accurately described as about 7 km east-southeast of Sheberghan (which is between Andkhui and Aq Chah) and just south of Baba Deqahn, and not on many maps.

Regards,
Chuck Wagner

Rich Larkin

Hi Chuck,

You said:

As my father used to say, "Don't be subtle with me. I'm too stupid." So, could you translate that?

Rich Larkin

Chuck Wagner

James, Marvin, et al,

Here's the other really piece I have with very glossy wool, a Sulaymani piece from northern Afghanistan that I suspect dates at, or a little before, WW II. I see no evidence of a chemical wash; the gloss is pretty similar in the reds but rather different in the blue - I would expect real consistency with a post-weaving chemical treatment.

This thing is really tough to photograph - for some reason the reds oversaturate badly. Still, I managed to get a couple that capture that rather unique bluish cast that the red wool has:







As for subtlety Rich, I'm just passing along an old comment - almost verbatim - and rather well couched in dry British wit.

Regards,
Chuck Wagner