Lot Essay
The combination of cypress and other trees forming a 'garden' is one that dates back a considerable way in Persian history, even to before the Islamic era (Erdmann, Kurt: Seven Hundred Years of Oriental Carpets, London 1970, pp.66-68). It is a noticeable background feature of medallion carpets and also can be seen on some 'vase' technique carpets of the seventeenth century (see lot 89). By the eighteenth century it featured both as one of the main border designs of North West Persian 'garden' carpets (as lot 121) and also as the main field design, as seen here.
Eighteenth century carpets with this design have been attributed to North West Persia (Erdmann, K.: Oriental Carpets, Tbingen, 1960, pl.126), North East Persia (the same carpet, Il tappeto orientale dal XV al XVIII secolo, Eskenazi Exhibition catalogue, London, 1981, pl.31), just 'Persia' (Dimand, M.S.: The Kevorkian Foundation Collection of Rare and Magnificent Oriental Carpets, New York, 1966, pl.VI), and even India (HALI 41, September/October 1988, advertisement p.59).
The first of these two carpets was one of the crucial pieces used by Michael Franses when he suggested a Khorassani origin for the group. It has a very clearly drawn design and strong colours. These, coupled with the use of 'jufti' knotting encouraged him to place it clearly within the group he was defining. This argument he embellished in his introduction to one of the sections of the Kirchheim catalogue ('The Caucasus or North East Persia, A Question of Attribution', in Kirchheim, H.: Orient Stars, Stuttgart, 1993, pp.94-100).
The present carpet, in the drawing of the field is very reminiscent of the first carpet discussed above. It also uses occasional jufti knotting. It, together with the other two examples, would appear to come from a stage in the development of Khorassani carpets, when the wool used was very soft (as in lots 72 and 151), the structure means the carpet is much more pliable than the contemporary products of the Caucasus, and the drawing is still very accurate (in contrast to most Caucasian weavings). These carpets have the same wool and handle as the carpets generally acknowledged as Khorassani dating from around 1800, such as lots 4 and 60.
Eighteenth century carpets with this design have been attributed to North West Persia (Erdmann, K.: Oriental Carpets, Tbingen, 1960, pl.126), North East Persia (the same carpet, Il tappeto orientale dal XV al XVIII secolo, Eskenazi Exhibition catalogue, London, 1981, pl.31), just 'Persia' (Dimand, M.S.: The Kevorkian Foundation Collection of Rare and Magnificent Oriental Carpets, New York, 1966, pl.VI), and even India (HALI 41, September/October 1988, advertisement p.59).
The first of these two carpets was one of the crucial pieces used by Michael Franses when he suggested a Khorassani origin for the group. It has a very clearly drawn design and strong colours. These, coupled with the use of 'jufti' knotting encouraged him to place it clearly within the group he was defining. This argument he embellished in his introduction to one of the sections of the Kirchheim catalogue ('The Caucasus or North East Persia, A Question of Attribution', in Kirchheim, H.: Orient Stars, Stuttgart, 1993, pp.94-100).
The present carpet, in the drawing of the field is very reminiscent of the first carpet discussed above. It also uses occasional jufti knotting. It, together with the other two examples, would appear to come from a stage in the development of Khorassani carpets, when the wool used was very soft (as in lots 72 and 151), the structure means the carpet is much more pliable than the contemporary products of the Caucasus, and the drawing is still very accurate (in contrast to most Caucasian weavings). These carpets have the same wool and handle as the carpets generally acknowledged as Khorassani dating from around 1800, such as lots 4 and 60.