.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
This rug belongs to a small group with very similar field designs. In the central column, bold ivory directional palmettes alternate with rounded blue flowerheads. To each side are similar columns, with yellow flowers between blue or purple palmettes. Connecting them is a lattice, including further small flowerheads and distinctive serrated leaves. A member of the group was published in 1996 when in the collection of Dennis and Zinaida Dodds (Dennis Dodds and Murray Eiland, Oriental Rugs from Atlantic Collections, Philadelphia, 1996, no.30, p.30). Two more have been in these Rooms, including one offered, 19 April 2016, lot 23 and another sold 7 October 2014, lot 26. Both those examples have the same border as the present lot. The latter was previously sold in these Rooms, 14 April 1988, lot 18.
The two rugs offered at Christie's were attributed to West Anatolia according to Eiland and Dodd's publication. However, when the example sold in 1988 was published in HALI the writer was more cautious. Though agreeing that it was ‘almost certainly 18th century’, the writer described it only as ‘Turkish’, defying a reader to find another example and describing it as an ‘ideal contender for a “show and tell” evening’ (‘Auction price guide’, HALI, 39, 1988, p.86). The write-up does acknowledge the fact that the border on that rug, which matches that on the present lot, has an affinity with Kula rugs woven in Western Anatolia.
However, the field design is one which Charles Grant Ellis describes as ‘a favourite for early Caucasian carpets’ (Early Caucasian Rugs, 1975, Washington D.C., p.66). The Textile Museum in Washington D.C. has one rug attributed to Karabagh or Shirvan which has a similar arrangement of motifs in the field, including the distinctive serrated leaves (acc.no.R36.2.2). Weavers evidently experimented with different scales in the field, including examples upon which the motifs were miniaturised (such as one in the Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna, acc.no. Or 320/1891/1907 HM Nr. 13890) or others where motifs were magnified, (such as a kelleh in the Vakiflar Museum, Istanbul, inv.no.A-300). In contrast to the border, the field on the present rug would be much more at home in the Caucasus.
Such blending of elements is characteristic of rugs woven in the so-called ‘Golden Triangle’, an area inhabited predominantly by Kurdish speakers between eastern Anatolia, western Iran, and the southern Caucasus. Alberto Levi has done much work to trace the trajectory of Kurdish carpet weaving: in a 1993 article, he illustrated a kelleh similar to the Vakiflar example mentioned above, describing it as a ‘Caucasian vase carpet’ to reflect his belief that it descended from the Safavid tradition (Alberto Levi, ‘Renewal and Innovation: Iconographic Influences on Kurdish Carpet Design’, HALI, 70, p.89, fig.7). In a later article, he traces the development of later pieces, such as a small number of colourful rugs with directional palmettes in a lattice which – for him – exemplify the blending of Caucasian and Anatolian traditions in the ‘Golden Triangle’ (Alberto Levi, ‘The Golden Triangle Syndrome’, HALI, 214, p.109). Based on this recent scholarship, this group can be reattributed to this important and culturally vibrant region.
The two rugs offered at Christie's were attributed to West Anatolia according to Eiland and Dodd's publication. However, when the example sold in 1988 was published in HALI the writer was more cautious. Though agreeing that it was ‘almost certainly 18th century’, the writer described it only as ‘Turkish’, defying a reader to find another example and describing it as an ‘ideal contender for a “show and tell” evening’ (‘Auction price guide’, HALI, 39, 1988, p.86). The write-up does acknowledge the fact that the border on that rug, which matches that on the present lot, has an affinity with Kula rugs woven in Western Anatolia.
However, the field design is one which Charles Grant Ellis describes as ‘a favourite for early Caucasian carpets’ (Early Caucasian Rugs, 1975, Washington D.C., p.66). The Textile Museum in Washington D.C. has one rug attributed to Karabagh or Shirvan which has a similar arrangement of motifs in the field, including the distinctive serrated leaves (acc.no.R36.2.2). Weavers evidently experimented with different scales in the field, including examples upon which the motifs were miniaturised (such as one in the Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna, acc.no. Or 320/1891/1907 HM Nr. 13890) or others where motifs were magnified, (such as a kelleh in the Vakiflar Museum, Istanbul, inv.no.A-300). In contrast to the border, the field on the present rug would be much more at home in the Caucasus.
Such blending of elements is characteristic of rugs woven in the so-called ‘Golden Triangle’, an area inhabited predominantly by Kurdish speakers between eastern Anatolia, western Iran, and the southern Caucasus. Alberto Levi has done much work to trace the trajectory of Kurdish carpet weaving: in a 1993 article, he illustrated a kelleh similar to the Vakiflar example mentioned above, describing it as a ‘Caucasian vase carpet’ to reflect his belief that it descended from the Safavid tradition (Alberto Levi, ‘Renewal and Innovation: Iconographic Influences on Kurdish Carpet Design’, HALI, 70, p.89, fig.7). In a later article, he traces the development of later pieces, such as a small number of colourful rugs with directional palmettes in a lattice which – for him – exemplify the blending of Caucasian and Anatolian traditions in the ‘Golden Triangle’ (Alberto Levi, ‘The Golden Triangle Syndrome’, HALI, 214, p.109). Based on this recent scholarship, this group can be reattributed to this important and culturally vibrant region.