Re: Date on #3

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Salon ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Marvin Amstey on February 18, 1999 at 08:16:06:

In Reply to: Re: Date on #3 posted by dave stockwell on February 17, 1999 at 21:32:39:

: Each of the four numerals is different. So, what remains is to match each with the four possible Arabic numerals that have vertical elements and secondary elements to the right of the vertical element. These possibilities are 1, 2, 3 and 4. The first numeral is definitely a "1". The fourth is definitely a "4" (the two disembodied knots form the hook). This leaves "2" and "3" for the second and third numerals. Since the second numeral is wider, it must be the "3". This leaves "2" for the third numeral. The last assignment explains the anomalous bulge at the top right of the second numeral. Thus, the date reads "1324". This translates to C.E. 1906, a perfectly reasonable date for the piece I see.
: cordially, d.s.

I agree it may be reasonable, but I have seen a number of rugs published with clearly read dates of 1,2,3,4suggesting that these are nonsense numbers much like the nonsense writing in cartouches of late 19th c. rugs. Marvin

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Salon ] [ FAQ ]