Lot Essay
The origin of the design seen in the present carpet is clearly the carpets of the 'vase' group with large scrolling 'sickle' leaves. Two of the best known are illustrated in Pope (A.U.: A Survey of Persian Art, Oxford, 1938) one in the Corcoran Gallery (pl. 1234), the other in the Gulbenkian Museum, Lisbon, (pl. 1253). The latter in its single plane construction and similar design is closer to the present carpet.
The movement of seventeenth century designs to eighteenth century North West Persia and the Caucasus is well documented. The Gulbenkian sickle-leaf design was adapted in a number of ways. In an example in the Harold M Keshishian Collection (Yetkin, Serare: Early Caucasian Carpets in Turkey, London, 1978, vol. II, pl.220, p.93) it is the palmettes within the leaves which predominate. In the present example, as in a later carpet in the Textile Museum (Ellis, Charles Grant: Early Caucasian Rugs, Fort Worth, 1975, no.36, pp 102-103) it is the leaves which encircle either a small rosette or, as in the Washington example, nothing. A variant on the theme was demonstrated by a Caucasian needlework panel sold recently in London (Sotheby's, London, 18 October 1995, Lot 17). Here again the leaves contained nothing, while the lozenge medallions between the leaves were prominent. This needlework however, in its similarity in design to the present lot, helps demonstrate its age as being at the beginning of the eighteenth and not nineteenth century, denoted by Ellis (op.cit, p. 102)
The field design in the present carpet contains all of the elements of that most favoured of all the nineteenth century designs, herati pettern. The lozenges which so typify later examples are here only beginning to form, each of the four sides comprising a split palmette as in the well known Afshan pattern. So was herati pattern an invention of merely a popularisation by Herat? This design is held within a border which must be considered among the most beautiful of all 18th century designs.
The movement of seventeenth century designs to eighteenth century North West Persia and the Caucasus is well documented. The Gulbenkian sickle-leaf design was adapted in a number of ways. In an example in the Harold M Keshishian Collection (Yetkin, Serare: Early Caucasian Carpets in Turkey, London, 1978, vol. II, pl.220, p.93) it is the palmettes within the leaves which predominate. In the present example, as in a later carpet in the Textile Museum (Ellis, Charles Grant: Early Caucasian Rugs, Fort Worth, 1975, no.36, pp 102-103) it is the leaves which encircle either a small rosette or, as in the Washington example, nothing. A variant on the theme was demonstrated by a Caucasian needlework panel sold recently in London (Sotheby's, London, 18 October 1995, Lot 17). Here again the leaves contained nothing, while the lozenge medallions between the leaves were prominent. This needlework however, in its similarity in design to the present lot, helps demonstrate its age as being at the beginning of the eighteenth and not nineteenth century, denoted by Ellis (op.cit, p. 102)
The field design in the present carpet contains all of the elements of that most favoured of all the nineteenth century designs, herati pettern. The lozenges which so typify later examples are here only beginning to form, each of the four sides comprising a split palmette as in the well known Afshan pattern. So was herati pattern an invention of merely a popularisation by Herat? This design is held within a border which must be considered among the most beautiful of all 18th century designs.