.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
The field design of this Tabriz carpet is a very good example of the classic mid-sixteenth century medallion and spandrel design. The outlines of the major motifs are fairly angular as is to be expected, and the pendants to the medallion very pronounced. The majority of the designs are executed linked by fine angular almost spidery arabesques. Many contemporaneous comparisons for all these features can be found.
It is, however, the border which makes it remarkable. Only one other example of this border is known, on the Poldi Pezzoli hunting carpet signed by Ghiyath al-Din Jami and dated AH 949/1542-43 AD (J. Thompson and S. Canby: Hunt for Paradise, exhibition catalogue, New York and Milan, 2003, no.12.19, pp.296-7; or Pope, op.cit, pl.1118). The basic design of the present border is identical, although the details vary considerably. Ours includes paired birds in the green arabesques while the filling of the Milan border is denser with considerably finer detail. This is certainly partly as a result of the larger scale on which the Milan example was woven: it is half as big again in each direction. The two carpets are woven with a similar knot density and, contrary to some reports, the Milan carpet is on cotton rather than silk warps. At the time of weaving the weaver appears to have added silk fringes into the structure (Hunt for Paradise, p.297). In overall design the Milan carpet draws on the contemporaneous weavings from Kashan while the present example uses the local tradition in Tabriz much more obviously.
It is, however, the border which makes it remarkable. Only one other example of this border is known, on the Poldi Pezzoli hunting carpet signed by Ghiyath al-Din Jami and dated AH 949/1542-43 AD (J. Thompson and S. Canby: Hunt for Paradise, exhibition catalogue, New York and Milan, 2003, no.12.19, pp.296-7; or Pope, op.cit, pl.1118). The basic design of the present border is identical, although the details vary considerably. Ours includes paired birds in the green arabesques while the filling of the Milan border is denser with considerably finer detail. This is certainly partly as a result of the larger scale on which the Milan example was woven: it is half as big again in each direction. The two carpets are woven with a similar knot density and, contrary to some reports, the Milan carpet is on cotton rather than silk warps. At the time of weaving the weaver appears to have added silk fringes into the structure (Hunt for Paradise, p.297). In overall design the Milan carpet draws on the contemporaneous weavings from Kashan while the present example uses the local tradition in Tabriz much more obviously.