Turkotek Discussion Forums

Turkotek Discussion Forums (http://www.turkotek.com/VB37/index.php)
-   Virtual Show and Tell (http://www.turkotek.com/VB37/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Flat weave bags (http://www.turkotek.com/VB37/showthread.php?t=3904)

Marla Mallett June 5th, 2017 10:47 PM

Hi Joel,

Yes. Since we can't see the reverse side of Gerry's panels, we can only guess that they are single interlocked. But Chuck's kilim for sure. If Gerry could give us a close-up of the reverse side of the weaving, we might learn that it is something else.

Marla

Chuck Wagner June 5th, 2017 11:06 PM

Hi Marla,

Well, any thoughts as to a tribal origin? In south Persia it's the usual suspects: Qashqa'i, Afshar, Khamseh, some Lors, Arabs... I had discounted Qashqa'i and Khamseh because I would expect to see the classic end frieze, which is absent here, and, there's no slitweave component. It doesn't look like any Afshar I've seen; they have had more complex border renderings.

Regards
Chuck

Marla Mallett June 6th, 2017 01:46 AM

Chuck,

Sorry! I don't have the necessary expertise to sort out the work from those S. Persian tribal groups. I've never been in the area. When I've bought pieces from that part of Iran, they've been from a long-time friend who works as a picker in the region. I've just attached his attributions. How's that for lazy?!

Marla

Gerry Gorman June 6th, 2017 09:12 AM

Apologies to all for being somewhat tardy in posting these extra images. I hope they help to clarify some of your hypotheses. Last image is the interior/reverse of the front panel.

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/FWedge1.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/FWedge2.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/FWedge3.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/FWedge4.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/FWedge5.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/FWinterior.jpg

Thank you all for your continued interest.

Gerry

Egbert Vennema June 6th, 2017 12:35 PM

Flat weave bags
 
Hi,to all. Me think,as not being an expert.. they are originating from Iranian Azerbaijan, some Afshar,( small floral motives in the black belt..) and something else pointing to the Caucasus ( The bluish green, Kurdish ? ) :laughing_2:.Regards ,Egbert Vennema.

Marla Mallett June 6th, 2017 04:41 PM

Thanks Gerry for these pics. NOW we have some answers. The back side of the tapestry weave shows DOUBLE-INTERLOCKING. So for me, all bets are off as to a provenance. Since the back panels seem clearly in these pics to be integral, these bags must have simply formed a large saddlebag originally. The TWO back sections are too large to have together formed the bottom of one mafrash. I've had saddlebags with these kinds of dimensions, however, from several places. Such are the hazards of forming opinions from inadequate photos.

Thus to attribute Gerry's piece(s) we need to look for a place where Double-Interlocked Tapestry was traditionally used. Groups such as the Shahsevan or Azeris who used slit-tapestry exclusively are very unlikely sources. Color and pattern are not enough.

On this thread, only Chuck's kilim features SINGLE INTERLOCKED TAPESTRY, and so we can assume it is from one of the more mysterious S. Persian groups. (Unless his kilim backside shows interlocked ridges also.)

My apologies for inaccurate too-quick pronouncements.

Marla

Filiberto Boncompagni2 June 6th, 2017 06:53 PM

We could call them UFOs. Unidentified Flat-woven Objects...:jester:

Joel Greifinger June 6th, 2017 07:06 PM

Hi Marla, Gerry and all,

As Marla suggests, one possibility is that this was originally a large double khorjin, perhaps a cousin to this smaller double-interlocked Bakhtiari bag:

http://www.turkotek.com/mini_salon_00027/fdble1.jpg

Another still might be that these are mafrash side panels. Since mafrash were often woven in pairs, both could have been repurposed by cutting off one side panel (presumably for sale) and folding over and sewing the plainweave bottoms of the remains. This would account for the lack of any remnant closure systems.

Of course, there are other plausible explanations before we need succumb to Filiberto's UFO designation. :eek:

Joel

Rich Larkin June 6th, 2017 08:14 PM

Quote:

Of course, there are other plausible explanations before we need succumb to Filiberto's UFO designation. :eek:
All us Uzbek Tartaris would be glad to take 'em in. :applause:

Joel Greifinger June 6th, 2017 08:58 PM

Quote:

Still, the apparently superficial resemblance between my fragment and Gerry's pair seems almost uncanny.
Perhaps because variants on these hooked diamond or kirkbudak or 'animal-head' motifs are ubiquitous across weaving groups in that part of the world.

Quote:

All us Uzbek Tartaris would be glad to take 'em in.
BTW Rich - is the feel and texture of the wool on the face of your Uzbek Tatari bag very soft?

Joel

Rich Larkin June 6th, 2017 09:34 PM

Hi Joel,

The uncanny part of the resemblance, I thought, was the way both items (i. e., Gerry's pair and my one frag) had a relatively warm palette on the face around a field of vaguely similar devices, and the backs shifted to stripes in a cool palette we didn't think even belonged with Gerry's bags.

My piece features a wool that is on the harder side, I would say. Part of that, as I noted upon dragging it out into the light, is it desperately needs a wash. (There is one stain, clearly acquired on the trek, that may have critters moving on it at the nano level. That, or some sort of unsettling fuzzy growth.) It wouldn't be described as "blanket-like."

Rich

Joel Greifinger June 6th, 2017 11:03 PM

Quote:

The uncanny part of the resemblance, I thought, was the way both items (i. e., Gerry's pair and my one frag) had a relatively warm palette on the face around a field of vaguely similar devices, and the backs shifted to stripes in a cool palette we didn't think even belonged with Gerry's bags.
Hi Rich,

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were referring to the design. :confused:

In addition to being double-interlocked, another thing that Gerry's piece has in common with your Uzbek Tartari piece:

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/larkin2.jpg

and mine:

https://s21.postimg.org/btt1jys5j/Tartari.jpg

are those rows of little rosettes at the edge of the field:

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/FWinterior.jpg

Joel

Rich Larkin June 6th, 2017 11:29 PM

Yup. :sherlock:

Quote:

"...those rows of little rosettes at the edge of the field.":

Joel Greifinger June 7th, 2017 01:32 AM

Quote:

Yup.
Rich,

Had you already pointed that out and I missed it? :banghead:

I asked about the feel of your Uzbek Tartari bag because all of the ones that I've felt have had a distinctive handle with extremely soft wool. From your description, it sounds like perhaps I've experienced a skewed sample.

Joel

Chuck Wagner June 7th, 2017 01:42 AM

Hi,

Here's an Uzbek bagface that we have. Like Rich's piece, this is definitely not Merino wool. This is a hard and rather itchy variety - not kemp - but going that way. That bolsters the Anomalous Joel hypothesis.



http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/Uzkil1.jpg


http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/Uzkil2.jpg


http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/Uzkil3.jpg

Regards
Chuck Wagner

Rich Larkin June 7th, 2017 01:43 AM

Hi Joel,

Nah, I didn't mention the rosette stripe. I put in the Sherlock on the issue of, does Gerry possibly own a pair of Uzbek Tartaris?

I do not expect my fragment to come out of a bath with a much softer feel. I will let you know, though.

Rich

Patrick Weiler June 7th, 2017 04:13 AM

This is most likely a Bakhtiari bag. The wide format is a bit unusual, but the double interlocking construction is only used in Bakhtiari, Uzbek Tartari and Aimaq Hazara weavings. The colors alone eliminate the Uzbek and Aimaq areas. And the one conclusive picture showing the back - with the much more saturated colors than the front - may indicate a later piece from the early 20th century.
Patrick Weiler

Gerry Gorman June 7th, 2017 12:33 PM

Thank you to everyone for your contribution and I have to apologise for not providing sufficient photographic evidence in the first instant to allow you all to venture more accurate opinions. I should have know better as it frustrates me when individuals post images of Chinese porcelain on certain specialist forums without showing the base which more often than not is the bit which shows the most evidence of an object's origin, I will learn for the future.

Regards,

Gerry

Joel Greifinger June 7th, 2017 05:52 PM

Quote:

This is most likely a Bakhtiari bag...The colors alone eliminate the Uzbek and Aimaq areas.
Hi Pat,

Agreed. :cheers:

In addition to the different palette, the drawing of the 'hooked-diamond' in Uzbek Tartari pieces seems always to be approximately the way it appears in the four examples in the thread:

http://www.turkotek.com/mini_salon_0...les/Uzbek1.jpg

https://rjohnhowe.files.wordpress.co...ler2.jpg?w=450

https://s23.postimg.org/dx19wkue3/Tartari-_Rich.jpg

http://www.turkotek.com/show_and_tell/Uzkil1.jpg

as well as all of the others I've seen, including:

https://s8.postimg.org/da2cofhl1/Tartari_Yohann.jpg

https://s3.postimg.org/n6i9784gj/Tartari-_Cole.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...b231422b29.jpg

As for the lines of little rosettes, they're quite popular on Bakhtiari weavings, like this bag

https://s30.postimg.org/p2p0fjkj5/Ba...i-rosettes.jpg

and this kilim that also has a drawing of the hooked-diamond motif and a border design that is quite close to the one in Gerry's bags:

https://s11.postimg.org/rv75f25fn/Ba..._kilim_det.jpg

Joel

Egbert Vennema June 8th, 2017 06:24 AM

Hi to all ,quoting; ;" wake up and smell the flowers " ( or coffee if you please.) And goodmorning from the other side of the Atlantic, as you all know, i m not an expert . But ... if your are going to (Deleted) ( Yes ....a dealer..) website, and you ll search for the term " Sofreh " you ll get an example of a great Afshar Sofreh example ( in my humble profane opinion ) in this flowered flatweave matter.:yin_yang:


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.