.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
After the fall of the Mamluk dynasty in 1517, Cairo's carpet workshops had to adapt to accommodate the taste of the new Ottoman regime and began to combine Turkish design aesthetics with the materials and techniques of Mamluk carpet production. This can clearly be seen in the present rug, which retains the Mamluk palette of greens, blues and reds and the same soft, silky wool, but the design is very different. The intricate, geometric designs of the Mamluk carpets have been eschewed in favour of curvilinear drawing, naturalistic floral forms and sickle leaves forming a happy marriage of two artistic traditions creating some of the most elegant carpets that survive today.
The designs for these new Ottoman Cairene carpets were probably created by the Imperial workshop or nakkashane in Istanbul. The nakkashane was the body responsible for the creation of designs for textiles and ceramics of the Ottoman court and these designs were then sent out across the Ottoman Empire, (see Walter Denny ‘Textiles’, in Tulips, Arabesques and Turbans, London, 1982, pp.125-126). This centralization of design and the success of the elegant floral forms led to similar motifs being used across a range of different media. The design of the central wreath medallion is a good example of this design dissemination as it appears in a number of other contemporaneous artistic disciplines such as the Iznik tile panels at the tomb of Selim II in Istanbul, that date to the last quarter of the 16th century (Ertug and Kacabiyik, Gardens of Paradise, 16th century Turkish Ceramic Tile Decoration, Istanbul, 1998, pl.51, p.98) and in a repeated pattern on a number of silk textiles (Nurhan Atasoy, Ipek: The Cresent and the Rose, Imperial Ottoman Silks and Velvets, Istanbul, pl.54-58, pp.104-109).
Comparable carpets have been found for the different individual elements of the present lot but we have been unable to find another rug that combines all these design elements in one weaving. The scale of the drawing and the organisation of the field design is very closely related to the Dirksen Cairene carpet, sold in these Rooms, 8 April 2014, lot 22 and a Cairene carpet in the Österreichisches Museum für angewandte Kunst in Vienna, Inv. no. T8344/1922 KB, which also has identical ogival spandrels to the present lot. (Angela Volker, Die orientalischen Knüpfteppiche im MAK, Vienna, 2001, pl.9. p.65). Another carpet, from the Bernheimer Family Collection of Carpets, sold in these Rooms, 14 February 1996, lot 83, has a very similar small format and rhythm to the field, although the drawing appears more cramped than the other two examples. While all three of these comparable carpets have different circular medallions, they all have in common a field design that appears as an endless repeat of symmetrical ‘S’ scroll stems and rosettes resolving in twinned sickle leaves, with the medallion and spandrels superimposed on top of the tracery, see Serare Yetkin, Historical Turkish Carpets, Istanbul, 1980, fig.35 and 36, pp.113-115.
The wreath medallion of the present lot is more commonly found in prayer rug format such as the wonderfully elegant Sultan Ahmet I prayer rug in the Topkapi Saray Museum (Hülye Tezcan, The Topkapi Saray Museum Carpets, London, 1987, pl.1). The Topkapi example appears to be the earliest form of this wreath medallion and is very precisely drawn. It has a very similar border to the present lot and the original form of the diamond-shaped medallion would have appeared much closer to the present example before it was reduced down the central vertical axis. Three additional related prayer rugs with wreath medallions are illustrated in Charles Grant Ellis’s article, ‘The Ottoman Prayer Rugs’, The Textile Museum Journal, Vol II, No.4, Washington DC, 1969, pp.10-14. These are the Benguiat prayer rug, now in the Textile Museum, Washington DC (Inv.no. 1967.24.1), an example in the collection of the Prince of Liechtenstein and the prayer rug in the Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin (Inv. no.77.321). One of the most appealing details on our rug is the inclusion of the beautiful cintamani inner minor stripe. This charming design is also rather idiosyncratic in the present rug; at two points on one side and one point on the other side the wave motifs confront each other and subsequently change direction. A similar cintamani minor stripe can be found on a number of 16th century Ottoman carpets such as the beautiful fragment in the Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna (Angela Volker, ibid., pl.7, p.59, Inv. no. Or 374/1888/1907 HM), but without the slightly quirky rhythm.
The designs for these new Ottoman Cairene carpets were probably created by the Imperial workshop or nakkashane in Istanbul. The nakkashane was the body responsible for the creation of designs for textiles and ceramics of the Ottoman court and these designs were then sent out across the Ottoman Empire, (see Walter Denny ‘Textiles’, in Tulips, Arabesques and Turbans, London, 1982, pp.125-126). This centralization of design and the success of the elegant floral forms led to similar motifs being used across a range of different media. The design of the central wreath medallion is a good example of this design dissemination as it appears in a number of other contemporaneous artistic disciplines such as the Iznik tile panels at the tomb of Selim II in Istanbul, that date to the last quarter of the 16th century (Ertug and Kacabiyik, Gardens of Paradise, 16th century Turkish Ceramic Tile Decoration, Istanbul, 1998, pl.51, p.98) and in a repeated pattern on a number of silk textiles (Nurhan Atasoy, Ipek: The Cresent and the Rose, Imperial Ottoman Silks and Velvets, Istanbul, pl.54-58, pp.104-109).
Comparable carpets have been found for the different individual elements of the present lot but we have been unable to find another rug that combines all these design elements in one weaving. The scale of the drawing and the organisation of the field design is very closely related to the Dirksen Cairene carpet, sold in these Rooms, 8 April 2014, lot 22 and a Cairene carpet in the Österreichisches Museum für angewandte Kunst in Vienna, Inv. no. T8344/1922 KB, which also has identical ogival spandrels to the present lot. (Angela Volker, Die orientalischen Knüpfteppiche im MAK, Vienna, 2001, pl.9. p.65). Another carpet, from the Bernheimer Family Collection of Carpets, sold in these Rooms, 14 February 1996, lot 83, has a very similar small format and rhythm to the field, although the drawing appears more cramped than the other two examples. While all three of these comparable carpets have different circular medallions, they all have in common a field design that appears as an endless repeat of symmetrical ‘S’ scroll stems and rosettes resolving in twinned sickle leaves, with the medallion and spandrels superimposed on top of the tracery, see Serare Yetkin, Historical Turkish Carpets, Istanbul, 1980, fig.35 and 36, pp.113-115.
The wreath medallion of the present lot is more commonly found in prayer rug format such as the wonderfully elegant Sultan Ahmet I prayer rug in the Topkapi Saray Museum (Hülye Tezcan, The Topkapi Saray Museum Carpets, London, 1987, pl.1). The Topkapi example appears to be the earliest form of this wreath medallion and is very precisely drawn. It has a very similar border to the present lot and the original form of the diamond-shaped medallion would have appeared much closer to the present example before it was reduced down the central vertical axis. Three additional related prayer rugs with wreath medallions are illustrated in Charles Grant Ellis’s article, ‘The Ottoman Prayer Rugs’, The Textile Museum Journal, Vol II, No.4, Washington DC, 1969, pp.10-14. These are the Benguiat prayer rug, now in the Textile Museum, Washington DC (Inv.no. 1967.24.1), an example in the collection of the Prince of Liechtenstein and the prayer rug in the Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin (Inv. no.77.321). One of the most appealing details on our rug is the inclusion of the beautiful cintamani inner minor stripe. This charming design is also rather idiosyncratic in the present rug; at two points on one side and one point on the other side the wave motifs confront each other and subsequently change direction. A similar cintamani minor stripe can be found on a number of 16th century Ottoman carpets such as the beautiful fragment in the Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna (Angela Volker, ibid., pl.7, p.59, Inv. no. Or 374/1888/1907 HM), but without the slightly quirky rhythm.