Welcome to TurkoTek's Discussion Forums

Archived Salons and Selected Discussions can be accessed by clicking on those words, or you can return to the Turkotek Home Page. Our forums are easy to use, and you are welcome to read and post messages without registering. However, registration will enable a number of features that make the software more flexible and convenient for you, and you need not provide any information except your name (which is required even if you post without being registered). Please use your full name. We do not permit posting anonymously or under a pseudonym, ad hominem remarks, commercial promotion, comments bearing on the value of any item currently on the market or on the reputation of any seller. Kurdish Kleptomania? - Turkotek Discussion Forums


Go Back   Turkotek Discussion Forums > Virtual Show and Tell

Virtual Show and Tell Just what the title says it is.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 29th, 2018, 08:01 PM   #1
Joy Richards
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 53
Default Kurdish Kleptomania?

Hi all,

Despite Panavoli's excellent drawings and descriptions of spin and ply directions and knots, I still find it almost impossible to 'read' the backs of rugs. So I'm not trying that with this carpet and will leave it to you. I will get there eventually with the help of looking at and comparing real rugs in good light ...

The carpet belongs to my friend's mother who bought it about 40 years ago at the urging of her Tehran-born Armenian son in law. It measures either 8 x 6 or 7 x 5. I personally don't really like it, but I thought it interesting enough to try to identify bits and pieces of it. Heavily reliant on Peter Stone's Tribal & Village Rugs, of course.

The medallions are surely those illustrated on page 273 in Stone - titled Other Tribal and Village Motifs - used (and named) by Karadja, a town near Heriz, whose weavers are of Turkish descent. (So it must be symmetrical knot). But the rugs of Karadagh, an area south of Caucasian Azerbaijan, also use the same medallions. I am further encouraged by the fact that he says the Karadja I and II medallions are usually alternated with Karadja medallion III on rugs with a long format. And here we have either I or II with III in the centre:



I just want you to know how thrilled I was to find this!

However, I then moved to the field repeats and decided they could be Qashqa'i until I looked a bit closer and tried to locate where the 8 'rosettes'/'8-leaved palmettes ? whatever they're called that appear beside the bottom medallion,closer to the middle medallion and to the left and right of the topmost medallion could come from. Couldn't find them. But the smaller trees with the down-sloping branches - about 10 of them - were found in the Bijar field repeats on page 193 - the Garrus Design. Of course this doesn't mean that it's not used by anyone else, but it's a little hint.











I wouldn't know where to start with the borders, narrow or wide, because from what I've found, the design is borrowed from here and there, so I've come to the conclusion that it's probably Kurdish. Not the Kurds in Quchan. And maybe they were basically just using a slightly different interpretation of their Surchi medallion which apparently is a motif unique to them. (Page 31)

I could be totally off on all counts, but am somewhat comforted by "Kurds appropriate the motifs of the broader culture surrounding them. These are Iranian, Anatolian and, to a lesser extent, Iraqi and Azerbaijani cultures. Their creative adaptation of these motifs is the charm and attraction of Kurdish rugs." But it's also what makes it so difficult for starters like me!

What does anybody think?

Joy
Joy Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2018, 04:41 AM   #2
James Blanchard
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 15
Default

Hi Joy,

I would suggest "Karadja / Karaja" as an attribution.

Regards,

James
James Blanchard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2018, 04:52 AM   #3
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 141
Default

Hi Joy,

Quote:
"...I still find it almost impossible to 'read' the backs of rugs."
I know I have dropped a lot of confusing blather on you, but I would like to try here to give you a few simple hints that simplify the 'reading of the back' of a rug. They do not require you to fool around with spin and ply of wool. (In fact, in over fifty years of kicking rugs, I do not believe I have ever attributed one based on spin and ply. I am pretty sure every strand of rug yarn I have ever met was Z-spun, S-plied. So, diagnosing that feature narrows the rug at hand down to every rug in the world. Or something like that.)

First, it is not possible to know the knot by merely looking at the back. Whether a knot is symmetrical (SY, or 'Senneh') or asymmetrical (AS, or Turkish), there will be two strands of warp involved, each wrapped by yarn, forming a 'node'. What can be read pretty much at a glance is whether the warps are on the same level (aka, 'flat back'), partially depressed, or fully depressed. I would like to post images here to illustrate, and I wanted to pick images already posted here recently. I seem to remember there is a way to do that without having to bother Steve or Filiberto. But I forget how to do it. So, I will have to direct you to images presently posted.

For starters, look at the fifth or sixth images you have posted with this wannabe Karadja. In both of those images, the warps are running horizontally. So, follow the several horizontal lines of double-nodes in the same color. Because each node and the warp it surrounds is on the same level with its partner node, you will not see a line of single nodes in one color anywhere in the rug. Thus, you know it is flat back with all warps on the same level.

For another example of the same thing, look at Frame #76 (by Chuck Wagner) in the thread you started on June 30 entitled 'Caucasian Prayer Rug'. The fifth image in that group also has exclusively double nodes, with just the suggestion here and there of one of the nodes being slightly less prominent than the other. No lines in the direction of the warp showing single nodes of one color.

Now look in the thread started on August 5 by Danielle Duperreault, Frame #1, second image. That is the back of a rug with several lines of single nodes in one color. That is because the second node of each knot has been forced into the body of the rug by a taut weft pulling one warp (and the node wrapped around it) into the rug, where the node is hidden, and the other to the 'outside', where that node of the knot is visible. Thus, anyone with an eye for this sort of thing can merely glance at the back of the rug, follow the design along the direction of the warps, and discern that there are many lines of single-nodes one color. Immediately, one knows that the warps are fully depressed. (If you look carefully at the area of red in the border on the right of that image, just to the right of the gap between the beige Z-form and the sky blue Z-form, you will barely notice just to the left of each red node, the nearly buried other node of that knot. It happens!)

Finally, go back to the 'Caucasian Prayer Rug' thread you started on June 30 at Frame #84. I posted a few images there of a dubious Baluch mat. The third is a close-up of the back in which you can see one of the nodes of each knot prominently, and its partner nearly but not completely concealed. The warps on that piece are partially depressed. Furthermore, if the fingers or fingernails are drawn horizontally across the back at a right angle to the direction of the warps, it feels ribbed, and indeed, this type of back is called 'ribbed back.'

Yes, I know, "Blah, blah." But it isn't that difficult to get the hang of it, and one can tell a lot about the structure at a glance in this way.

Regarding the rug you posted, it is clearly aping the Karadja design approach, but I do not recall encountering a rug I thought was Karadja in that palette. The coloring reminds me of some rugs from Meshgin (Mishkin, etc.), which is not too far away. I am sure there has been a lot of back and forth around the region as far as rug designs go. BTW, I find your comments about Karadagh vs. Karadja interesting. I always wondered about the connection, and assumed the Karadja approach represented a more regimented version of the freer, older Karadagh tradition. Maybe that isn't so. BTW2, I am not sure who made the comment you quoted at the end of your post, but it is rue: The Kurds borrowed freely, and often brilliantly!

Rich
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2018, 03:03 PM   #4
Joy Richards
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 53
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Blanchard View Post

I would suggest "Karadja / Karaja" as an attribution.

Regards,

James
In looking at some of the late 19th C and early 20th versions of Karadja, this is a somewhat disappointing rendition. I suppose that can be said of most weaving now, but I could only find one new Karadja that has the ivory field/pallette, but nothing with the multitude of different motifs that this one has. It's no wonder the interest here is with the old rugs.

So it's basically from the Ardebil area, and it was probably new when it was bought, so from the nineteen sixties or seventies.

But thank you for focusing me!!

Joy
Joy Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2018, 03:16 PM   #5
Joy Richards
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 53
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Larkin View Post

Regarding the rug you posted, it is clearly aping the Karadja design approach, but I do not recall encountering a rug I thought was Karadja in that palette. The coloring reminds me of some rugs from Meshgin (Mishkin, etc.), which is not too far away. I am sure there has been a lot of back and forth around the region as far as rug designs go. BTW, I find your comments about Karadagh vs. Karadja interesting. I always wondered about the connection, and assumed the Karadja approach represented a more regimented version of the freer, older Karadagh tradition. Maybe that isn't so. BTW2, I am not sure who made the comment you quoted at the end of your post, but it is rue: The Kurds borrowed freely, and often brilliantly!

Rich
Rich,

Your patience with me is astonishing!! I promise I'm going to look at what you suggest. Thank you!

The comments I made were all from Peter Stone, including the last one about the Kurds borrowing freely, but I think I was wrong in my kleptomaniac comment and apologise to any who may be offended.

As mentioned in my response to James, this could have come from anywhere in that area but the combination doesn't work aesthetically. IMHO.

I checked whatever I could find on Meshgin, but the Karadja attribution seems to be closer, from the borders that I saw on some of their older rugs, one of which was quite lovely. I hope it's okay to post this, but it's just a pleasure to see how they once looked:

https://www.claremontrug.com/antique...-4288/massive/

Thank you again.

Joy
Joy Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2018, 03:51 PM   #6
Joel Greifinger
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 50
Default

Hi Joy,

For easier comparison, here are the images that Rich referenced in his most recent exposition:

Flat-back 1



Flat-back 2



Fully depressed



Ribbed or partial warp depression



This link will get you to a lovely collection of older Karaja rugs that have sold at auction over the years:
http://www.azerbaijanrugs.com/guide/...gs_carpets.htm

BTW - I don't think I've seen the suggestion that the weavers of Karaja rugs were Kurdish. As you note (from Stone), they are thought to be of Turkic origin.

Joel
Joel Greifinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2018, 09:23 PM   #7
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 141
Default

Hi Joel,

Thanks for dropping in the pertinent images.

And also for the line-up of nice old Karadjas.

Rich

Last edited by Rich Larkin; August 30th, 2018 at 09:38 PM.
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31st, 2018, 12:39 AM   #8
Joy Richards
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 53
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Greifinger View Post

This link will get you to a lovely collection of older Karaja rugs that have sold at auction over the years:

http://www.azerbaijanrugs.com/guide/...gs_carpets.htm

BTW - I don't think I've seen the suggestion that the weavers of Karaja rugs were Kurdish. As you note (from Stone), they are thought to be of Turkic origin.

Joel
Joel,

Now you're really spoiling me!! Thank you. This makes it much easier and I have absolutely no excuse now about knots.

And some beautiful rugs indeed were sold.

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that the weavers of Karaja were Kurds. I rather clumsily tried to explain that since all the different parts of the carpet didn't look homogenous, or from the same source, it must be a Kurdish concoction because that's what they do - except usually they do it brilliantly, as Rich says.

So I was only partially right - the medallions - but it's a slow learning process, and I'll continue the fight. Well, it's not really a fight. It's just a bit uphill.

Joy
Joy Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31st, 2018, 01:41 AM   #9
Joel Greifinger
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 50
Default

Hi Joy,

Burnishing my own pedantic credentials, let me point out that one of the features of Karaja rugs is that they are single-wefted. This means that there is only one weft (or weft unit) between each row of pile knots. So, from the back, it is often possible to see exposed warps in alternating rows going vertically down the length of the rug.



This diagram is, hopefully, worth a thousand words:



Joel
Joel Greifinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31st, 2018, 03:11 AM   #10
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 141
Default

Hi Joy, et al,

I have a problem with this being a basic Karadja rug. It seems more like a knock-off; or possibly a recent product of that venue that has come under new management, so to speak, with certain typical features having undergone change.

Most conspicuous is the coloration. White or off-white examples are occasionally seen, but besides the substitute of that color for the usual Karadja red field, they implement the standard Karadja palette. (There are actually two of the latter: the one in the example you linked, Joy, which reflects Heriz; and a cooler one, with the red more of a wine shade.) This one Joy posted has a very different palette; it is the reason I mentioned Mishkin, where many of the rugs feature beige with earth tones such as we see in this one. I am not necessarily suggesting this is Mishkin work, though it wouldn't surprise me if something in that vein was going on.

The field ornament surrounding the familiar Karadja three medallion set is not typical for Karadja rugs. If anything, it reminds me more of Abadeh rugs (North of Shiraz). In truth, it strikes me as contrived recent production. In addition, though it is single-wefted like a good Karadja should be, the back does not have the look I expect of a Karadja rug. That could be because the scale of the detail images is throwing me off, but the flecks of white warps showing through should be more regular.

Another troubling feature about which I may be making an inaccurate assessment is the red in the rug. If that strong red in the close-up shots, such as the outlines of the bird forms, is that faded pinkish shade on the surface, we (and the rug) are in trouble. What do you think, Joy, is that surface color badly faded?

Anyway, the thing doesn't have the feel of a proper Karadja as I see it.

Rich

P. S.: BTW, Joy, let me anticipate a possible comment from you: I have no objection whatsoever to your posting this rug. Keep 'em coming!

Last edited by Rich Larkin; August 31st, 2018 at 03:18 AM.
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31st, 2018, 05:26 PM   #11
Joy Richards
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 53
Default

From Rich:

I have a problem with this being a basic Karadja rug. It seems more like a knock-off; or possibly a recent product of that venue that has come under new management, so to speak, with certain typical features having undergone change.

Couldn't agree more. Ahem.

Most conspicuous is the coloration. White or off-white examples are occasionally seen, but besides the substitute of that color for the usual Karadja red field, they implement the standard Karadja palette. (There are actually two of the latter: the one in the example you linked, Joy, which reflects Heriz; and a cooler one, with the red more of a wine shade.) This one Joy posted has a very different palette; it is the reason I mentioned Mishkin, where many of the rugs feature beige with earth tones such as we see in this one. I am not necessarily suggesting this is Mishkin work, though it wouldn't surprise me if something in that vein was going on.

I found this one online which is new but has the different palette from the standard Karadja but is the same white/off white as the rug I posted



The field ornament surrounding the familiar Karadja three medallion set is not typical for Karadja rugs. If anything, it reminds me more of Abadeh rugs (North of Shiraz).

What about Qashqua'i?

In truth, it strikes me as contrived recent production.

Recent being from ... ?

In addition, though it is single-wefted like a good Karadja should be, the back does not have the look I expect of a Karadja rug. That could be because the scale of the detail images is throwing me off, but the flecks of white warps showing through should be more regular.

The back of the 'new' one for comparison with my friend's mother's:



Another troubling feature about which I may be making an inaccurate assessment is the red in the rug. If that strong red in the close-up shots, such as the outlines of the bird forms, is that faded pinkish shade on the surface, we (and the rug) are in trouble. What do you think, Joy, is that surface color badly faded?

I've only ever seen the rug once but you're right. It's very pinkish and doesn't have even an echo of red in it, other than in the top left hand corner, but that may have been the lighting. I didn't take the pictures.

Anyway, the thing doesn't have the feel of a proper Karadja as I see it.

Rich

P. S.: BTW, Joy, let me anticipate a possible comment from you: I have no objection whatsoever to your posting this rug. Keep 'em coming!

Haha!! Well, it may be a while before I find something worthy of being on here but I certainly won't stop looking. However, I wouldn't have had the presumption to try and identify any of it (apart from the medallions) had I seen Stone's comment on page 15 citing two examples of elements from complex motifs on Khamseh and Qashqa'i field repeats, both of which are "a melange of filler elements pulled from a very wide variety of sources. Tracking all these sources could qualify as an art-history dissertation." I will leave that to you art-historians, because I continue to be amazed at the collective dexterity - if I can use that word. Dexterity between eye and memory.

Joy
Joy Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2018, 01:32 AM   #12
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 141
Default

Hi Joy,

I have to conclude the two rugs you have posted in this thread do probably come from the so-called 'Karadja' matrix, and reflect something of a sea change in what had previously passed in the rug trade under that rubric. If it is so that your friend's mother acquired the first one forty years ago, I am surprised to learn this style of palette had arisen there that early. Whether the general weight and texture of the rugs changed as well (as it did in many Persian weaving venues through the middle to late 20th century), I can't really tell from the images. (Also, see comment below.) I will say, though, that I saw in Iran in 1967 a grade of Tabriz rug that had been (I was told) fostered by government authorities that was at least as fine as or finer than the best Isfahans and Nains, and it featured a distinctive palette of so-called “earth tones,” similar to the rug you first posted, including that “army green.”

I don't have any special expertise in 'Karadja' rugs, and my previous remarks were simply responses against what I have come to understand as the type over a good many years of looking. In this regard, you should get hold of a copy of Oriental Rugs, a Complete Guide, by Charles W. Jacobsen, first published in 1962 (...if you haven't already done so). Jacobsen was a prominent dealer in Syracuse, New York, and started in the trade in the mid-1920s. He had personal connections to a few of the more prominent early rug book authors, such as John Kimberly Mumford and G. Griffin Lewis, and these connections certainly set him up well in his early career, notwithstanding the informational shortcomings of those esteemed gentlemen. If his books are any measure, he was an extremely confident man with an A-type personality driving his pen, and the assurance with which he set down his opinions has made his works the object of criticism reaching in some cases to near derision in subsequent years. In truth, there are numerous errors and inaccuracies in the books, because he did not shrink from direct, even dogmatic language in laying out his views on the subject. But he did a pretty good job of covering the terminology and the principal types of rugs that were the core of the market in the years he was active.

Anyway, I digress. My point about steering you to Jacobsen is that his take on Karadja rugs (he spelled it "Karaja") even in 1962 (drawn on, he said, 38 years of experience) demonstrates a certain characteristic uncertainty about the facts on the ground in the midst of his confident assertions. Indeed, he covers the subject in two pages, and they serve as a good example to a beginner enthusiast of the difficulty in trying to get a clear and solid rug education from books. The organizational pattern of the book is a bit quirky and just a smidgen frenetic (if that is possible!), with most of it taken up with short discussions of terms (mostly regarding rug names used to indicate provenance) in alphabetical order. Thus, in two pages, we see consecutively, Karadagh, Karaja, Karaje. I won't try to summarize all of it, but if you can get the book (it used to be a staple text in many public libraries in the USA), you will see that some of the iffy discussion of Karadja rugs that has appeared here is also evident there: No one really knew what a ‘Karadagh’ rug was, though it may be OK to call a ‘Karaja’ a ‘Karadagh’; within the true ‘Karaja’ type, for reasons he could not explain, the mats and the 4’ X 6’ sizes tended to be significantly more finely woven than other sizes; ‘Karaje’ was not to be confused with ‘Karaja’, and rather described an older type of Kurdish runner, also with repeating medallions down the center. Does that sound like confusion? Well, it is, and was, and there you have the state of rug lore! But you should get a look at that volume, and read the two pages. It puts ‘Karadja’ in perspective as the term is understood (or misunderstood!).

BTW, in a limited way, I can attest to his comment about the 4’ X 6’ size having been finer than other sizes. I once handled a probate estate (I am a lawyer in another universe) that included an exceptionally fine 4’ X 6’ Karada rug of the wine-colored field, cooler palette type, with the characteristic three medallions of the kind in your first example. Unfortunately, though it had good pile clipped short originally in the manner of several extra fine Persian rugs, it was badly torn, a condition I concluded had been inflicted by a family dog. Not only Jacobsen, but also Edwards (whom Jacobsen rightly respected) said that the Karadja output came from a number of villages near Karadja proper, which may account for different qualities.

Rich
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2018, 04:38 AM   #13
Joy Richards
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 53
Default

Rich, thank you, that's very interesting and I'll be running to the reference library here as I see they have a copy of Jacobsen's Oriental Rugs.

And with reference to your quote from Jacobsen: "No one really knew what a ‘Karadagh’ rug was, though it may be OK to call a ‘Karaja’ a ‘Karadagh’; within the true ‘Karaja’ type, for reasons he could not explain, the mats and the 4’ X 6’ sizes tended to be significantly more finely woven than other sizes; ‘Karaje’ was not to be confused with ‘Karaja’, and rather described an older type of Kurdish runner, also with repeating medallions down the center.". A 'rug expert' from Iran, who was shown a picture of the carpet, felt it was of Ardabil origin - 'gharajeh' - but couldn't confirm till I sent the back. It was written I suppose as he pronounced it, which adds to the confusion.

But this is all very helpful to the owner of the carpet who asked me to see what you all thought. I will pass on the nice bits, not the 'sea change' that has happened.

And I am getting the hang of what 'recent' is and what is truly of interest!

Joy
Joy Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2018, 09:02 PM   #14
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 141
Default

Hi Joy,

I have not been suggesting there is anything wrong with your friend’s rug, only that it may not be from the ‘main line’ Karadja tradition one might think from inspecting the chief design element, viz., the three diagnostic medallions down the center (and the border!). My speculations are either that it was woven elsewhere, but probably near the usual Karadja weaving venues; or that those venues themselves had adopted some altered practices towards the latter part of the 20th century. Nothing revolutionary about either possibility. It would come under the familiar adage, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.”

If you google "Ardabil, Iran," you should get a link to the Wikipedia page for the place, on which appears (on my screen, at least) a rug that shows why your dealer informant was thinking "Ardabil" when he saw your pic of the rug with the Karadja medallions on a white-ish field of miscellaneous elements including plenty of barnyard fowl. The Wiki rug looks flatwoven, but the general correlation is obvious. I recall myself having seen quite a few then-recent pile rugs attributed to Ardabil in the 1960s and 1970s with a similar design layout (i. e., random doo-dads and critters strewn about the rug), most of them on a red field (cotton foundations). I wondered at the time why they reflected an approach to design that seemed to belong in Fars province, about 700 miles to the southeast (Qashqa'i, Khamseh, et al). I still don't get that part of it.

As to the relationship between Ardabil and Karadja, rug-wise, the former is the capital of the province of the same name; the latter is (according again to Wikipedia) a town, in the westerly adjoining province of East Azerbaijan, that had a population of 1,081 per the 2006 census. You may ask how a place of that size gets to create such confusion over rug provenance on the hallowed pages of Turkotek, or elsewhere. Ask away, but I doubt you will ever find out. In any case, Ardabil city and Karadja are separated east to west by about 70 Miles. But there do not appear to be direct connecting roads between them, because that land appears to be very sparsely populated, possibly due to rugged high elevations. Rather, it seems necessary to skirt that apparent massif by going north and west or south and west to get from Ardabil to Karadja. On the other hand, Heriz (Heris) lies only about twenty miles east of Karadja; and though the city of Ardabil is about sixty times larger than Heriz, if you go by population, Heriz is in my opinion a much more important rug-production name than Ardabil (disregarding the celebrated "Ardabil Carpet," presumably woven ca. 1540, but not necessarily in Ardabil). But such are the numerous anomalies of rug lore. In the end, I can readily accept that your Iranian consultant had his reasons for viewing Karadja as part of a larger Ardabil rug weaving matrix as he saw it. And though it is true I and plenty of other Turkotekkers seem to prefer older rugs, I certainly would not insist that anybody else do so. The mystery 'Karadja' is a perfectly good-looking item on its own terms.

Rich
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.