Posted by David R.E. Hunt on 05-05-2006 10:52 AM:


Hi John

I can't help but be struck by the similarities between these brocade fragments

and the designs sported by so many of or pile woven bag faces,
with their repeating motives,lattices, and this defining border which both demarcates the physical dimensions of the pieces and inparts this illusion of infinite repeat.

Given the central importance of the textile industry in Central Asia
and Turkey, remembering the significance attached to these ceremonial robes among the Ottoman and the Central Asian peoples,taking into account their long and extensive use and significance, coupled with the knowledge that there is a corresponding history of use of these same said textiles in fragment form as banners and decor, I don't believe that it is too difficult to conclude that these textiles could have played a significant role, exerted much influence, in the use and development of carpet designs in general and perhaps more specifically the Turkmen gul format.

Even the size of this fragment speaks to a kindered use or history, yet I am sure ergonomics play a role.

Find below an example of a Ming Dynasty brocade from the thread
Ikat, Brocade here on Turkotek.

Ikat, metal brocades, and even the Central Asian Palas are all brocades, if memory serves


Posted by Steve Price on 05-05-2006 11:05 AM:

Hi Dave

Just a small correction: ikat isn't a brocade, it's a flatweave in which either the warp or the weft (or both) has what will become the pattern dyed onto it before the weaving is done. Central Asian ikat is generally warp-faced, SE Asian ikat is weft-faced, and there are some double ikats made, I believe, in India.


Steve Price

Posted by David R.E. Hunt on 05-06-2006 09:56 AM:

Hi Steve

Yes, I agree in general that Ikat is not a brocade. But I thought I remembered seeing, when doing my armchair research for this last Palas Salon, some reference to Ikat (maybe this double ikat?)as being kindered to brocade, perhaps through some aspects of it's construction or weaving technique? I will see if I can locate this reference, but of course I may just be disremembering .