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. a tekke small rug - 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 March 2nd, 2019, 11:39 PM   #21
Chuck Wagner
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 82
Default

Hi John,

It would be helpful if those were twice as large, at least.

On my screen they are only 2 inches wide.

Regards
Chuck
Chuck Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 3rd, 2019, 12:39 AM   #22
Steve Price
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck Wagner View Post
Hi John,

It would be helpful if those were twice as large, at least.

On my screen they are only 2 inches wide.

Regards
Chuck
My fault - John sent me very large images, and I resized them. Looks like I was overly zealous.

John, if you'll send those to me again, I'll give them more generous dimensions.

Steve Price
Steve Price is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 3rd, 2019, 06:46 PM   #23
Steve Price
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 102
Default

Hi All

I've replaced the images in John's posts (#18 and #19) with larger versions of the same ones.

Steve Price
Steve Price is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 5th, 2019, 06:50 PM   #24
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 128
Default

Hi John,

Have any of your questions been answered? I have read your posts a few times, and I am finding the essence of your inquiry elusive. For one thing, try as I might, I am not seeing any latch hooks on the minor guls of your first image. And I was hoping to see close-ups (front and back) of that one, as the field color intrigues me.

One interesting feature of your last-posted rug is the character of the abrash in the field. I have the sense that the weaver must have been pulling yarn from two or three separate skeins, differently shaded, that were at hand, as contrasted with one skein in which the absorption of the color had been very uneven. I have a couple of fragments (from the same piece) that I think indicate the same phenomenon that I will post to illustrate the point.

Rich
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2019, 04:47 AM   #25
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 128
Default

Hi John,

This is the fragment I mentioned that displays at least three, probably four distinct colors of madder (i. e., red) yarn that make up the field. I find it difficult to dismiss the idea that this was an intentional weaving strategy, and I do not recall having noted the phenomenon in other Turkoman weavings of my aquaintance.



If the weaver was going for vibrancy, it worked, as the distinctly striated character of the ground is only conspicuous at close quarters.

Your last illustrated Tekke looks as though the same or a similar approach to filling in the field color was taken. Note that my fragment is not Tekke, but probably some species of Ersari (I am calling it Chub Bash). Nevertheless, it seems to me that the weaver of your rug had at least three skeins in distinct shades of red and was selecting from them deliberately in order to achieve those horizontal streaks of color, resulting in the familiar look of abrash.

Rich
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2019, 04:27 PM   #26
John Carpenter
Members
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 10
Default

Hi Rich,

Well, the short answer to your idea about the abrash in my latest submission is: Unlikely. If your hypothesis were the case, then the weaver would have most likely continued with a contrived abrash throughout the rug. However, she created this abrash in only the first seven inches or so of the field, measuring from where the weaver began the field on up. I suggest that she was using what she had and then continued with yarn that was more consistent in color.
Responding to your thoughts about the field color of the rug in my first submission, I suggest you check out the tekke mafrash on Plate 67 of Uwe Jourdan.That field color is pretty close to the one in my rug. When I can, I will send a photo of the back of my first submission that will show the color resemblance more strongly. The quartered guls you cited from Thompson bear only slight resemblance to the secondary gul in my first submission, but you can see similar secondary guls to those in my rug in Saryk pieces. See Jourdan, Plates 15, 16, 17, and 19. My mention of Plate 14 in Thatcher was only to suggest the early use of a diamond outline for secondary guls resembling the ones in my first submission.

Regards,
John
John Carpenter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8th, 2019, 05:06 AM   #27
Rich Larkin
Members
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 128
Default

Hi John,

Quote:
However, she created this abrash in only the first seven inches or so of the field, measuring from where the weaver began the field on up. I suggest that she was using what she had and then continued with yarn that was more consistent in color.
I take it we are talking about the rug posted in Frame #14. It seems to me there is more of the horizontal streaking in that rug than just the first several inches of the field at the bottom. Counting the stack of guls vertically from the bottom, it looks as though the field around #s 5 and 6 is a solid color of dark red; but the rest of the field shows some of the streaking to a greater or lesser extent. Anyway, I do not want to make too much of an issue about how studied the streaking may have been from the weaver's point of view. I would think that there were several balls or skeins of yarn around the loom, a situation I have witnessed myself in a few venues, and the weaver was apt to grab for one or another as things went along.

However, as regards my own fragment, I had owned it a good many years before I noticed one day how consistently the color changed subtly but unmistakably from one horizontal line to another. I don't look at it as "contrived abrash" so much as a possible attempt on the part of the weaver to create a heathered look in the field to give the piece some life. Who knows? I will say that from my own experience, some persons indigenous to the rug weaving areas of the Middle East do not look upon abrash as something to be desired in a rug. And one can see blatantly contrived abrash these days in any number of rug shops. (I always wondered where the term "abrash" came from. Curious that the word, "rash," is part of it, as those blatant examples tend to give me one. )

One more point about the quartered minor guls.
Quote:
The quartered guls you cited from Thompson bear only slight resemblance to the secondary gul in my first submission, but you can see similar secondary guls to those in my rug in Saryk pieces. See Jourdan, Plates 15, 16, 17, and 19.
I agree (though I do not have access to Jourdan). However, it seems the more notable phenomenon than the precise design details of the minor guls is the fact that simplified and diminutive versions of the classic quartered gul were selected for minor guls in the first place, rather than what we usually find in that spot. Of course, for what are probably aesthetically obvious reasons, the relative positions of the opposed like colors in the minor gul versions are the reverse of those positions in the principal guls; or at least, that is so in any examples I have seen. I think it makes for a dramatic effect.

Do try to follow up with the close-up of the field color in your first image. Anything showing those elusive latch hooks, which I have yet to spot, would also be great.

Rich
Rich Larkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2019, 03:33 AM   #28
John Carpenter
Members
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 10
Default

Hi All,

Requested photos are enclosed of the back only of my first submission which I hope, along with my message, address comments from Rich and Chuck:

This part of Turkotek is for show and tell; so I really don't think there is some elusive essence of my enquiry (Rich #24) yet to be disclosed. With my third submission I am still hoping some one can show comparables to its border in other Tekke rugs. Consider that an enquiry an answer to which seems pretty elusive right now.

Chuck found a comparable to the minor gul in my first submission. With regard to that submission I had hoped that some analogy could be advanced for showing that just as the Tekke carpet, Plate 28, in Mackie and Thompson ed., "Turkmen...," has a Salor gul for its minor gul, a similar phenomenon occurs with respect to the Saryk minor gul in my rug, and we might see some variation in its occurrence in other Tekke rugs. That idea isn't too elusive, I hope; for we actually see variation in the minor gul in my first submission that I described in detail in #10. For Rich, who found the latchhook motif in this minor gul so elusive, I have submitted a detailed photo. There may be something interesting here if this half gul turns out to be in part an archaic version of the Saryk minor gul reproduced in a Tekke rug. Chuck's example from rugs on the market seems late, but then my first submission is fairly late as well.

One phenomenon in these photos is how the field color varies depending on how far I stood from the rug. The more distant shot seems more accurate to me. Once again, this shows how elusive accurate photos of red can be in oriental rugs. Of the color illustrations in Mackie and Thompson, "Turkmen," Jon Thompson deemed them "only of adequate quality." (Thompson, "Oriental Carpets..." p.175.

Regards,

John








John Carpenter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2019, 04:06 PM   #29
Chuck Wagner
Members
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 82
Default

Hi John,

Seeing it close up now, what is a bit interesting about this piece is its departure from the norms.

The main border is made up entirely of motifs in common use as minor or guard borders on Turkmen pile weavings.

And the elem panels (the ends) display a form of the "dyrnak" gul, which is usually found on Yomud work.

As already noted, the minor guls are not especially common on rugs (as opposed to bags, etc.) - but the squared-off guls, close packing of the design, and the small turret border devices all still point toward later Tekke work.

It doesn't seem to me, to be a very late Afghan work, for what it's worth.

Here's an example of one that we have, a Tekke prayer rug from late 19th - early 20th century, with minor gul motifs in the border, and Saryk elements in the upper left and right panels:





Regards
Chuck

Last edited by Chuck Wagner; March 17th, 2019 at 05:05 PM.
Chuck Wagner 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 02:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.