SIGNED MUHAMMAD HASAN IBN MUHAMMAD REZA KASHANI, CENTRAL PERSIA, LATE 19TH CENTURY

The knot count measures approximately 8V x 7H knots per cm. sq.

The name ‘Mohtasham’ has come to be associated with rugs woven in Central Persia which share a number of diagnostic features, including the use of a fine kurk wool for the pile, a cotton structure with blue wefts, and an extremely fine quality of drawing and weaving. The close identification of this weaver with Kashan finds its origins in Arthur Cecil Edward’s book The Persian Carpet: a survey of the carpet-weaving industry of Persia, London, 1953. In it, he describes how a certain Hajji Mollah Hassan, whom Edwards refers to as ‘a merchant of substance’, found himself with a surfeit of Australian merino wool and asked his wife – who had been a weaver back in her native Arak – to make a rug from the excess (Edwards, op.cit., p.334). Though Parviz Tanavoli and Siawosh Azadi have both expressed doubt about Edward’s story, the latter records that he had heard ‘similar tales from the rug dealers in the Tehran bazaar’ associated with the name of Mohtasham, leading him to argue that Edward’s Kashani merchant and the famous weaver were one and the same (Siawosch U. Azadi, ‘The Mark of Mohtasham’, HALI 160, 2003, p.71).

Azadi identifies a small number of rugs bearing signatures which can be associated with Mohtasham, which exhibit some variation in terms of the length of the signature and the way in which the weaver is referred to. The most extensive signature is on two silk rugs, one of which was supposedly given to Nasir al-Din Shah on his coronation in 1848, which are signed ‘the work of [amal-e] Hajji Mollah Mohammad Hassan Mohtasham’ (Azadi, p.70, fig.6 and p.71, fig.8). A shorter inscription appears on a small cushion cover, identifying it as the product of the ‘workshop [‘karkhaneh’] of Hajji Mollah Hassan Mohtasham’ (Azadi, p.71, fig.7). The same inscription appears on a pair of rugs not mentioned by Azadi, of which one is in the shrine of Imam Reza in Mashhad and the other was with a dealer in Osaka in 2013. A further four rugs in Azadi’s article are simply signed ‘workshop [‘karkhaneh’] of Mohtasham’, together with the name of a patron (Azadi, p.66, fig.1; p.68, fig.2 and its unphotographed pair in a private collection in Tehran, and a final example dated to AH 1322⁄1904-5 AD, p.72, fig.9, which sold in these Rooms, 10 April 2008, lot 208). Though there is considerable heterogeneity in the signatures, the rugs share many features. The wool rugs (Azadi, figs.1, 2, 7, and 9; as well as the examples in Osaka and Mashhad) have a strongly saturated colour scheme of reds, oranges and midnight black, with reciprocal-‘Y’ guard stripes.

Our rug fits within that group both on the grounds of the signature and the structure. The palette and wool of ours is very similar to those on the four rugs listed by Azadi and the Mashhad and Osaka rugs. Ours is woven on a cotton structure, much like figs. 1 and 9 in Azadi’s article. The design of ours, structured around a striking arrangement of imbricated rhombuses, is a close match for the design of Azadi’s fig.2, and its unphotographed pair in Tehran, as well as the smaller bag face. An unsigned example of similar design is also published by Cecil Edwards (op.cit., p.342, fig.379).

Though we have not been able to find a close match for the signature, the ‘Mohtasham’ coronation rug of Nasir al-Din Shah does identify its weaver as a man by the name of Muhammad Hassan. Turning to the appearance of the signature, the script of ours is a close match to the nasta’liq which appears on all but two of Azadi’s signed group. While most have a white script on a black ground, his fig.1 has a cartouche much closer in style to ours, with an ivory cartouche containing a black script against scrolling orange vines. Unfortunately, we do not know whether the father of Muhammad Hassan Mohtasham was called Muhammad Reza. However, given the other striking stylistic and structural similarities between our rug and the others in the group, there is reason to believe that ours was at least woven in the Mohtasham workshop. Indeed, when the signature refers to the weaver by name and uses the formula amal-e rather than karkhaneh, it is equally likely that this was woven by the weaver himself. Either way, this would then amount to an important contribution to the small group of carpets known to have been woven by the enigmatic weaver who has come to be known as Mohtasham.