Bedroom at Château de Montpoupon

Montpoupon is a fortified castle destroyed during the hundred years war, and rebuilt during the Renaissance by the Prie family. The chateau has been inhabited by the same family since 1857.

An open window illuminates the interior’s history and creates its own atmospheric lighting in this little bedroom.

The dark wood and navy carpet combined exude a moody vibe – which is amplified by the light of the single window.

The space features a NW Persian carpet with an all over boteh design, which is quite incredible to find a pair for – and it just so happens that we have exactly that in our inventory.

Navy combined with softer blues and neutrals make this traditional design a strong, yet easy going choice.

Here’s the goods to make you feel like the King of your own castle:

Stock ID 20-10012

NW Persian

7’0″ x 11’6″

circa 1850

Check out some detail images to better view the nuances of this mid 19th century masterpiece. The subtle ahbrash of color within the rug is such a compelling feature.

View this carpet on our website, or contact us to see it in person!

Persian Formal Garden Carpet

Stock ID 20860

Persian Tabriz

11’0” x 17’9”

circa 1890

A stunning and easygoing Persian formal garden rug with neutral tones, which successfully represents elements of earlier and more elaborate antique garden carpets by use of specific design elements.

The field is segmented by one vertical channel and two horizontal ones which break up the garden into six sections of framed flowers and trees. At the intersection of these pathways we find circular floral cartouches which are representative of the house or gazebo often found in earlier representations of the garden carpet.

All in all a strong piece of work that pays tribute to the intricacies of garden carpets past.

To view this rug on our website please click here.

One Directional Royal Hunting Carpet

#20799

Kerman, Kerman Province, S.E. Persia

13’ x 18’9” (3.96 x 5.72m)

Circa 1900

Provenance: workshop of Master Weaver (Oustad Ali Kermani)

Structure

Structure: typical Kerman triple wefted weave.

Warp: cotton, beige, natural, Z-6-S-3-Z, machine spun cable.

Weft: cotton, beige, natural, Z-4-S handspun (?); 3 shoots alternating: 1^st and 3^rd wavy; 2^nd straight.

Pile: wool, Z-2; Persian (asymmetric) knots open left; 90º alternate warps depressed; horizental 16 x vertical 16-18 = 256-298/inch sq.

Sides: 1 cord of cotton warps, wrapped in dark blue wool.

Ends:  3/8” balanced beige cotton plainweave, then a fringe of warps bunched in 16’s and knotted.

Description and Iconography

This carpet is basically a royal hunt with a variety of hunters, animals, background flora, and small vignettes from other Persian tales.  The individual figures (and groups) are taken directly or otherwise from miniature paintings.  Both the field and border have the same style of hunter on horseback and are unified by the dark blue ground. 

Among the traditional figures are:

1. The hunter attacked by a lion – here the designer has omitted the dagger wielded by the royal figure as the beast attacks;
2. the hunter with a sword attacking a lion;
3. a hunter, in this case with a Shah ‘Abbas style mustache, with a bow;
4. hunters lassoing wild goats – one is clearly a shepherd, one a more noble figure;
5. hunter spearing a (small) leopard;
6. hunters with daggers attacked by lions;

Of particular note are the variegated saddle-covers of the riders.

Other figurines are taken from Persian miniatures as well:

1. The figure, naked to the waist, with crown and sumptuous robes on a tree is probably Shirin bathing in a pool from Khosrow and Shirin by Nizami;
2. the semi-clothed male figure confronted by a female, probably represents Majnun and Laila from the tale of the same title, also by Nizami;
3. the regal woman in a howdah on an elephant may be Shirin or Laila or perhaps is from another tale.  The details of the howdah indicate that it was closely copied from a painted original.

There is a wide variety in male headgear: crowns with and without high internal caps; stick turbans, flat caps, felt hats.

The figure of Bahram Gur may be represented by a lion hunter or may simply be an inspiration for these generic hunters.

The hunters wield:

• scimitars (shamshirs)
• bows and arrows
• maces
• lassoes
• curved daggers

The fauna is widely varied and includes:

• lions
• tiger
• wild horses
• domesticated horses
• boars
• leopards in two color ways
• cheetahs
• antelope
• wild goats
• harpis or sphinxes with human heads and breasts
• hunting hawks
• Indian elephant
• various hunting dogs
• monkeys
• bulbuls
• doves
• two types of Simurgh
• other birds
• reindeer (spotted)
• rabbits
• wolf
• tapir (?)
• dragon

The floras are equally diverse, but not so identifiable, though probably include prunes, flowering peach daisies, roses, etc.  The background is in a millefleurs style.

Odd motifs include the severed hand in the jaws of the wolf, and the harpy head with the cheetah.  Animals attack other animals.  In particular, the huge scaly dragon ascending toward the bird’s nest: this is a symbol of evil attacking the innocent.  Another is the small Simurgh devouring a dove.  There are no combats of purely terrestrial animals.

There is no perspective and there is a naive juxtaposition of figures and decorative elements.  The color palette, as is common in the best Kermans, is extremely wide and there are probably 15 or more colors.

Attribution and Dating

A possible attribution of the design is to Zeman Khan of Kerman.  Compare his Interpretation in wool of the 16^th century Kashan silk hunting carpet in Vienna from 1922 (Edwards, A. The Persian Carpet, London 1953, ill. 214, p. 227) – in which some of the figures are identical, although, as in the original, all wear the mid-century stick turbans.  Also close are the renderings of the animals, especially the shading of the horses.  Note particularly the analogous spotted horse in each carpet.  The colorful saddle covers of the riders are all extremely similar.

The use of classical Persian motifs from carpets and paintings was particularly popular in Kerman in the 1900’s.  Even in the minor borders – an alternation of div (demon) heads and female faces – reference to earlier prototypes is made.  In some 16^th century carpets demon faces are a border motif.

Edwards dates a pictorial unidirectional piece with a similar millefleurs ground to circa 1890.  The millefleurs ground of our piece and the 1900s carpet are virtually identical.  Thus, an attribution of Zaman Khan and a date in the early 1900’s are most likely.

To view this rug on our website, click here.

NW Persian Interpretation of Indian Prototype

#20419

Northwest Persian Gallery Carpet

Probably Kurdistan, Possibly Kolyai

6’4” x 15’8”

3^rd quarter 18^th Century

This antique gallery format carpet is a particularly fine example of a select group of Kurdish carpets accurately interpreting a 17^th century Mughal Indian Agra prototype.

The abrashed and slightly corroded brown field displays a complex, dense allover one-way pattern of three blossom flowers, small palmettes and geometric rosettes connected by fractional split arabesques and broken vertical staves.

Although the pattern seems to be textile-derived, in fact there are surviving Indian pile carpets with a virtually identical pattern.  Most salient are the split arabesques in ivory, yellow, red, and royal blue which delineate a quasi-lattice pattern.  The field is densely covered and there are no open areas.  The pattern is balanced in all directions, a sign of a skilled workshop.

The main navy border displays two types of palmettes, rosettes, and embracing pairs of lancet leaves, with matching ivory minor stripes of repeating, discrete squares of trefoiled double flowers.  These flowers appear exactly on contemporary Kirshehir Turkish rugs and later in the 19^th century on Luri tribal rugs.

The weave employs symmetric (Turkish) knots on a mixed foundation of cotton warps and single wool wefts between knot rows.  This structure is common in Kolyai Kurdish carpets of the period. The kelleh format is also a Kolyai specialty. A small number of these carpets are known, often with burgundy fields.  Ours is unusual for its brown ground.  All share the same design.  How a classic Indian carpet got to Kurdistan to copy is one of the many unsolved rug mysteries.  Add in the Turkish style minor borders and one has a doubly curious, but highly attractive and totally authentic carpet.  A few pieces in related patterns have been assigned to Malayer to the east on the basis of weave character, but they are of the same age.  A date for our piece at the 3^rd quarter of the 18^th century is quite acceptable.

To view this rug on our website, click here.

Lively Haji-Jalili Tabriz Carpet

#20106

Origin: Persia

Region: NW Persia

Type: Tabriz Haji Jalili

Size: 12’ 9” x 20’ 6”

Circa 1890s

The rust red field displays an overall pattern derived from the general pool of Islamic textile motives, most specifically from the Persian 16^th and 17^th centuries.  The Tabriz carpet designers created thousands of distinct patterns based on this repertoire of rumis (split arabesques), islimis (curving vines), palmettes, flower heads, leaves and other quasi-vegetal ornaments.  The main border part takes elements of this same design. The cloud band minor borders descend almost directly from classical Persian prototypes of the 1^st half of the 16^th century.

The wool pile is typically Tabriz – brisk, erect, firm, and slightly dry.  In the best qualities it is an excellent long wearing material. In great part it originates in the immediate area and is processed in Tabriz where it is spun by hand via spindles rather than wheels.

The attribution to “Haji Jalili” is traditional. There are only a few carpets actually and unequivocally signed “Haji Jalili”.  The assumption of a much larger group is based on physical similarities: same knotting style and pile treatment, general quality, etc.  As of course, “Haji Jalili” if he is at all responsible for the carpet, did not actually weave it.  Indeed, he probably never laid a constructive hand on it.  The rug workshop consisted of actual weaving operatives, supervisors, managers and others responsible for the whole manufacturing and marketing process.  It is most appropriate to consider this term as a quality level rather than an attribution of origin.  Even though no archrival evidence has come to light confirming “Haji Jalil’s” ownership of a rug factory in Tabriz in the late 19^th century, the term is generally accepted as referring to a distinct group of carpets of high quality made from 1880 to 1900 in Tabriz often in very large sizes.

The color variation (Abrash) in the field may have several distinct causes. In such a large carpet they may have been an insufficient initial batch to complete the entire field. Since dyeing was even in the most accomplished ateliers, something of a hit or miss procedure, color matching may not have been entirely successful, or the dyes may have aged differently after matching initially on exposure to light and washing agents.  The color divergence may have developed over time.  Further, chemical treatment which in Tabriz meant a light wash in lime water and which was applied to most local production, may accentuate underlying differences.  The variation in the secondary colors may be a conscious choice to vary details in such a large rug.

The area near the border on one hand of variance may be a furniture mark, the result of protection from light by a chair or other piece of furniture. This area has a more saturated tone than the rest of the section.

Large Tabriz carpets of the late 19^th century are almost invariably custom orders from overseas clients via the dealer network in NY and London.  The large size indicates that the client was probably American.  

The almost complete lack of dark blue is quite unusual.  The rumi arabesque varies in color row wise along the length of the carpet, thereby giving a very large piece a sense of movement and lightness. This color change is subtler in the underlying islimis.  To add further interest, the field pattern is not exactly balanced top to bottom. Further, the paired curving leaves change color in succeeding rows. What could have been a monotonous creation has become a lively and movement filled piece. The development of the pattern is almost temporal, a progressive elaboration on a basic theme.  This “Haji Jalili” Tabriz carpet has all the characteristics of a sustained work of art.

To view this rug on our website, click here.

Unique Lavar Kerman Rug

Rug #: 18371

Type:  Kerman – Lavar Carpet

Origin: South East Persia

Size: 16’6” x 22’6”

Circa: 1870-1880

Foundation: Cotton warps and cotton wefts.

Pile: Wool

Main Colors: camel, brown, charcoal, coral red, light aqua, light blue, and ivory.

The almost black field of this very fine antique Kerman displays an imaginative, elaborate version of the classic Persian Harshang “crab” pattern of complex pelmets, diamonds, step quadrangles, and a wide variety of stylized flowers and angular vines.

This is framed by an independent ivory cartouche with pelmets and vines, and frequent projections toward the main border. It is not till later broken border, but it points in that direction.

The true main border, also ivory, has a palmett and spray pattern reminiscent of the 17^th century vase carpets of Kerman. Rose with blue, and black guard borders containing stylized central patterns paint the whole.

As with almost all Kerman carpets of this period, the design is unique and was likely commissioned from a local artist specializing in one of a kind carpet patterns.  There are no other examples of any size or color way in this pattern.

The use of elaborate overall pattern on Lavar style Kermans is especially developed in this period, and this carpet is a particularly fine example with a wide color palette and rich ground color.

The Abrash is subtle and just enough to give a color depth and eye-catching variation.

The weave is extremely fine and is generally seen only on smaller pictorial and other scatter size Kerman’s.

To view this rug on our website, click here.

Bakhshaiesh #22410 | A Comparative Essay

Our Rug:

#22410
Bakhshaiesh
7’6” x 11’4”
Circa 1880

As Compared With:

#49 Northwest Persian Knotted Carpet
As seen in Seltene Orientteppiche Vol 5
by Eberhart Herrmann – p 104-105
325cm x 435cm (appx: 10’7” x 14’3”)
Circa mid 19^th century

This essay aims to compare two carpets alike in style, to point out the differences and similarities for the purpose of highlighting the historical evolution of design in the Bakhshaiesh weaving region.

The first, and most obvious, difference between the two rugs is the size of the finished product.  The example published in Seltene Orientteppiche is a much larger carpet, probably woven for export to Europe or America, while our rug has a size more indicative of use in a Persian home. 

Moving on we note that both pieces employ what is known as an animal pelt design element – which refers to the shape of the shield within the field being reminiscent of animal fur carpets.  While both carpets utilize a soft camel colored wool within the shields, the blue ground color found outside of this shape is softer on our rug, and our medallion red compared to navy in the published piece.  In both carpets the ribbon which separates the shield from the blue ground is decorated with gridded five-piece squares, which is recurrently used throughout both as a textural fill for many of the design elements.  Our rug’s ribbon differs, however, by the use of indentations which seem to grasp the shield within.

In the publication of the example piece, Herrmann discusses another carpet woven circa 1800 (published by Schurmann in 1976) which utilizes this color scheme as well as the depiction of “archaic dragons in the field and corners, which are explained by the proximity of the Caucasus”.  He concludes based on this model that our example piece utilizes “extremely stylized and simplified animal shapes for which early Turkish animal carpets should also be used for interpretation” –  pointing out that the sickle-shaped C motifs found in the stylized forms of the carpet are also found in earlier characterizations of animals in these Turkish rugs.

While our rug does not utilize this “C” shape within the stylized forms, it further distorts the execution of this design element with an angular hook motif connected to block shapes.  It is unclear what exactly these blocks are to represent.  Perhaps another difference to point out is the overall fluidity vs rigidity between the stylized forms of the two carpets.  Those found in the published example are more both more angular in their shape, as well as more linear in their placement than those found in our rug.

Both rugs also provide representations of smaller animals dispersed through the field, though the published example showcases very small representations of birds, as well as two human figures, not present in our carpet.  Herrmann theorizes that “the depiction of two figures dressed differently can indicate that the carpet was made for a special occasion, such as a wedding.” 

Other elements to note variation with are the use of flowers in the field of the example piece, while our rug utilizes crosses.  The example carpet also displays repetition of the same flowers in a linear row along the sides of the shield, while our rug makes use of a wider area to house a more intricate floral and leaf vine pattern. The most notable variation between the two designs is probably the border.  Our rug’s border is less busy than the example – displaying a large scale flower and leaf pattern which is somewhat rigid in its application.

One final thing to note is that the published example was likely woven to be viewed from either end of the carpet – as the design elements are woven in reverse of each other from the center of the rug.  In our rug on the other hand, the elements are one directional, which is noted even by the horns displayed at each end of the arms which project vertically from the central medallion.

Is one rug’s design better than another?  I believe it is all in the eye of the beholder; style is a preference, personal to the viewer.  One thing is clear however, and that is the fact that both of these carpets were woven in, and influenced by cultural context of, a specific weaving area.

Rug of the Week Carpet #21055

Persian Rug #21055, size 18’0″ x 10’10”

Antique Northeast Persian Carpet

Khorassan Province

Later 18^th Century

Khorassan was a truly enormous Persian province, once extending all the way to the Oxus River, bordering on  true Central Asia. Even After the eastern parts were lost in the Afghan invasion after 1722, the province still encompassed vast areas of desert and steppe with important cities like Meshed and productive farmland. Carpet weaving in the area goes back centuries with Herat, the old capital and now in Afghanistan, famous in the 16^th century for its fine rugs. Our antique Persian carpet is not from Herat, but was probably woven in the area around Qain (the Qainat) or more likely in the town itself as it has, as we shall see, all the marks of an urban production of the period.

After the fall of the Persian Safavid ruling dynasty in 1722, there was a decided fall off in patronage as the nation descended into invasions and disorder.  As a result, the remaining carpet workshops cut costs to survive and this meant, among other things, the elaborate medallion designs and the designers who conceived them were replaced by repeating patterns derived from textiles which could be easily and elegantly executed in pieces of any size or format. Thus appeared the now iconically Persian Herati, Gol Hennai, Mina Khani and Boteh patterns. Our design is a particularly felicitous variant on the Gol Hennai pattern.  A primary diamond lattice is formed by a repeat of four cypresses or leaves framing a large rosette and smaller rosette bosses uniting the cypresses. A thinner, secondary lozenge lattice connects the cypresses and large rosettes. This pattern is found in both northeast and northwest Persian rugs, runner and large carpets.  As to where it originated, that is unsure, but by the early 19^th century it was in use both in Khorassan and in Azerbaijan in early antique Heriz carpets. In both areas light grounds, ivory as here, were the preferred overall tonalities.

The red-orange main border with in and out main palmettes, sickle leaves and smaller rosettes, all linked by double angular vines seems to appear about the same time as the field pattern, and the navy blue connected “S” guards are frequent accompaniments in both weaving areas. In sum, our 21055 is a perfect embodiment of a period style. Khorassan would thus seem to be the place of origin for the field /border design combination around 1750 or so.

The size and perfection of execution as indicated by the pattern balance in all directions implies an experienced and highly professional workshop working for discerning patrons who expected an artistically and technically superior product. Although many Persian carpets of the period are long and narrow, there are certainly exceptions and 21055 clearly predates the period of Western export demand.

The foundation is all cotton and the woolen pile is tied with the Khorassan version of the jufti knot (on four warps rather than two), giving a lighter handle than usual. In a culture where only unshod feet touch a carpet, this still gives plenty of wearability. Our piece is in good condition for its age and proper care will give it many more years of attractive appearance. All the colours are from natural sources; indigo for the blue and either madder or cochineal for the reds. Yes, you can make oranges from cochineal.

There are very few carpets of this post-Classic period surviving, especially in this large size and ultra-desirable colour scheme. Our carpet 21055 is a particularly attractive solution of a perennial question: how to cover a large floor area without excess busyness, keeping formality without rigidity and authenticity without making an overt issue of it.

#18425 Kerman – Lavar: Circa 1900

Rug#: 18425

Origin: SE Persia

Type: Kerman – Laver

Size: 9’8” x 21’2”

Warp: hand spun cotton

Weft: hand spun cotton

Pile: wool

Sides: 2 ply wool

Circa: 1900

Main Colors:  soft blues, navy, beige, ivory, tan, soft gold.

The present carpet originates in SE Persia, specifically the Ravar region of the Kerman province.  The town and surrounding regions have a long history of rug making, dating back to at least to the beginning of 17^th century.

The formality of this rug is evident, with rows of flower-filled lozenges creating an almost architectural lattice feel.  This style of alternating lines can be seen in other Ravar patterns of this period, and seems to be a lingering pattern type popular in the late 19^th century carpets of this area. The rug is in relatively good condition (evenly low) considering Kermans of this type were usually woven with a thin pile to start.

Because of its location in a mountainous region of SE Persia, the sheep bred in the area have long produced the highest quality wool.  For this reason, the rugs coming from this region have all been produced using the most lustrous and luxurious wool, which over time has improved just by simple process of being walked on.

Kermans and related type rugs such as Ravar and Yazd carpets are amongst the most sought after antique carpets in today’s market. Their generous dimensions, subtle color combinations and fanciful patterns make them appealingly adaptable to room settings of varied décor.

The price of Kermans with good balance of color and composition have steadily risen, while pieces of average quality have dropped.

#40-1205 Bakhshaiesh: circa 1880

Rug #:  40-1205
Type:    Bakhshaiesh
Origin:  Azerbaijan Province, NW Persia
Size:     10’0” x 14’6”
Circa:   1880

A uniform field of light camel displays an ascending overall floral pattern of linked rosettes attached by geometrically angled branches.  The main border of linked stylized rosettes with attendant hyper-formalized floating leaves is a variant of the “crab” border of the Caucasus and NW Persia.  The pattern appears on other pieces from this area and period.  The four minor borders are identical in style and typically Heriz in design.

By 1910 the overall patterns popular in the Revival Period (1870-1895) are supplemented by the familiar angular medallion design.  Thus, this example is particularly unusual and rare, and cannot be duplicated by other large carpets from this milieu.

The name “Bakhshaiesh” applies to Heriz district carpets from the later 19^th Century in both overall and medallion layouts.  However, weaves and design styles vary so greatly that a specific attribution as to origin is impossible.  There is a town with this name on 20^th Century maps, but not on earlier ones, thus further complicating any attributions.  Of the inscribed Heriz area rugs from this period, few indicate a place of origin, and never “Bakhshaiesh”.  Hence it is best to restrict its application to a style-color-quality combination.  The handsome piece presented here exemplifies this rare amalgamation of traits.

*To view this rug on our website, please use the following link:
http://www.rahmanan.com/inventory/show/40-1205/

*Post written and edited by Peter Saunders & Katrina Mauro