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. Flat weave bags - Page 2 - 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 June 5th, 2017, 10:47 PM   #21
Marla Mallett
Members
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 14
Default

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
Marla Mallett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2017, 11:06 PM   #22
Chuck Wagner
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 88
Default

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
Chuck Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 01:46 AM   #23
Marla Mallett
Members
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 14
Default

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
Marla Mallett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 09:12 AM   #24
Gerry Gorman
Members
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Wicklow Ireland
Posts: 7
Default

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.













Thank you all for your continued interest.

Gerry
Gerry Gorman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 12:35 PM   #25
Egbert Vennema
Members
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiedam, The Netherlands
Posts: 13
Default 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 ? ) .Regards ,Egbert Vennema.
Egbert Vennema is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 04:41 PM   #26
Marla Mallett
Members
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 14
Default

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

Last edited by Marla Mallett; June 6th, 2017 at 09:42 PM.
Marla Mallett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 06:53 PM   #27
Filiberto Boncompagni2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14
Default

We could call them UFOs. Unidentified Flat-woven Objects...
__________________
Filiberto Boncompagni
Filiberto Boncompagni2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 07:06 PM   #28
Joel Greifinger
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 56
Default

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:



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.

Joel
Joel Greifinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 08:14 PM   #29
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 108
Default

Quote:
Of course, there are other plausible explanations before we need succumb to Filiberto's UFO designation.
All us Uzbek Tartaris would be glad to take 'em in.
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 08:58 PM   #30
Joel Greifinger
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 56
Default

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

Last edited by Joel Greifinger; June 6th, 2017 at 09:15 PM.
Joel Greifinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 09:34 PM   #31
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 108
Default

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
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 11:03 PM   #32
Joel Greifinger
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 56
Default

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.

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



and mine:



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



Joel
Joel Greifinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2017, 11:29 PM   #33
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 108
Default

Yup.

Quote:
"...those rows of little rosettes at the edge of the field.":
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 7th, 2017, 01:32 AM   #34
Joel Greifinger
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
Yup.
Rich,

Had you already pointed that out and I missed it?

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
Joel Greifinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 7th, 2017, 01:42 AM   #35
Chuck Wagner
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 88
Default

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.











Regards
Chuck Wagner
Chuck Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 7th, 2017, 01:43 AM   #36
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 108
Default

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
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 7th, 2017, 04:13 AM   #37
Patrick Weiler
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 21
Default

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
Patrick Weiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 7th, 2017, 12:33 PM   #38
Gerry Gorman
Members
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Wicklow Ireland
Posts: 7
Default

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
Gerry Gorman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 7th, 2017, 05:52 PM   #39
Joel Greifinger
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 56
Default

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

Agreed.

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:









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







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



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:



Joel
Joel Greifinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 8th, 2017, 06:24 AM   #40
Egbert Vennema
Members
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiedam, The Netherlands
Posts: 13
Default

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.
Egbert Vennema 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 04:34 AM.


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