Changes

The history of Persian carpet manufacture is fraught with unproven hypotheses, rash assumptions, and confident assertions that flout historical evidence. Indeed, scholars hold widely differing opinions on almost every aspect of the production of Persian carpets. As Edward Gibbon said in another connection, “the melancholy duty is imposed upon the historian” of trying to determine what facts are beyond dispute<ref>p. 505</ref>. They are few.<br>

The history of Persian carpet manufacture is fraught with unproven hypotheses, rash assumptions, and confident assertions that flout historical evidence. Indeed, scholars hold widely differing opinions on almost every aspect of the production of Persian carpets. As Edward Gibbon said in another connection, “the melancholy duty is imposed upon the historian” of trying to determine what facts are beyond dispute<ref>p. 505</ref>. They are few.<br>

The discovery of the Pazyryk carpet<ref>Created: Pazyryk Culture. 5th - 4th century BC. Found: Pazyryk Barrow No. 5 (excavations by S.I. Rudenko, 1949). Altai Territory, Pazyryk Boundary, the Valley of the River Bolshoy Ulagan. The world's most ancient pile carpet was found in the largest of the Pazyryk burial mounds. Its decoration is rich and varied: the central field is occupied by 24 cross-shaped figures, each of which consists of 4 stylized lotus buds. This composition is framed by a border of griffins, followed by another one of 24 fallow deer. The widest border contains 28 figures of men on horseback and dismounted. The once bright yellows, blues and reds of the carpet are now faded, but must originally have provided a glowing range of colours. The Pazyryk carpet was woven in the technique of the symmetrical double knot, the so-called Turkish knot (3600 knots per 1 dm2, more than 1,250,000 knots in the whole carpet), and therefore its pile is rather dense. The exact origin of this unique carpet is unknown. There is a version of its Iranian provenance. But perhaps it was produced in Central Asia through which the contacts of ancient Altaians with Iran and the Near East took place. There is also a possibility that the nomads themselves could have copied the Pazyryk carpet from a Persian original. Source: Hermitage Museum (https://www.hermitagemuseum.org/wps/portal/hermitage/digital-collection/25.+Archaeological+Artifacts/879870/)</ref> and an even earlier fragment in tombs in Siberia revealed that the manufacture of knotted-pile carpets is of far greater antiquity than had previously been supposed.<ref>see vi, below</ref> The oldest previously known pile carpets were manufactured in Anatolia in the 7-8th/13-14th centuries<ref>Denny, p. 23</ref>. With the exception of several fragments from Sasanian levels at Shahr-e Qumis<ref>see vi, below</ref> and possibly of a fragmentary lion carpet recently purchased by the De Young Museum in San Francisco<ref>see vii, below</ref> no Persian pile carpet can definitely be said to survive from before the 10th/16th century<ref>Hubel, p. 160</ref>. There is literary evidence for the existence of carpets in western Asia from pre-Islamic times<ref>cf. Edwards, pp. 2-3; cf. vii, below</ref>, but it is impossible to say whether or not they were knotted. The famous jeweled garden carpet of Ḵosrow I at Ctesiphon was almost certainly not a pile carpet but a flat weave or an embroidery<ref>BAHĀR-E KESRĀ “The spring of Ḵosrow” (Ṭabarī), Farš-e zamestānī “Winter carpet” (Baḷʿamī), or Bahārestān “Spring garden” (Ḥabīb al-sīar), a huge, late Sasanian royal carpet. The carpet measured 60 cubits (araš, ḏerāʿ) square (ca. 27 m x 27 m), that may have covered the floor of the great audience hall (Ayvān-e Kesrā) at the winter capital of Madāʾen. Representations of paths and streams were embroidered on it with gems against a ground of gold. Its border was embroidered with emeralds to represent a cultivated green field in which were flowering spring plants with fruit embroidered with different colored gems on stalks of gold with gold and silver flowers and silk foliage. It was used as a place to drink, as if in gardens, when the winter winds blew. The Ḥabīb al-sīar explains that when one sat on it in winter, it was as if it was spring. When Madāʾen fell to the Muslims in 16/637 this carpet was too heavy for the Persians to carry away so it was taken with the other booty. The Muslims called it al-qeṭf “the picked” and, since it was left over after Saʿd b. Abī Waqqāṣ divided the booty, he sent it to ʿOmar in Medina. Although the assembly agreed that ʿOmar should use his own judgment in disposing of it, ʿAlī was concerned lest someone be deprived of a rightful share in the future; so ʿOmar cut it up and divided it among the Muslims. Although ʿAlī did not receive one of the best pieces, he sold his for 20,000 dirhams. Source: Encyclopædia Iranica</ref>; a pile carpet of the size described (ca. 27 m square) would probably have weighed more than two tons<ref>cf. Edwards, p. 2</ref>.<br>

The discovery of the Pazyryk carpet<ref>Created: Pazyryk Culture. 5th - 4th century BC. Found: Pazyryk Barrow No. 5 (excavations by S.I. Rudenko, 1949). Altai Territory, Pazyryk Boundary, the Valley of the River Bolshoy Ulagan. The world's most ancient pile carpet was found in the largest of the Pazyryk burial mounds. Its decoration is rich and varied: the central field is occupied by 24 cross-shaped figures, each of which consists of 4 stylized lotus buds. This composition is framed by a border of griffins, followed by another one of 24 fallow deer. The widest border contains 28 figures of men on horseback and dismounted. The once bright yellows, blues and reds of the carpet are now faded, but must originally have provided a glowing range of colours. The Pazyryk carpet was woven in the technique of the symmetrical double knot, the so-called Turkish knot (3600 knots per 1 dm2, more than 1,250,000 knots in the whole carpet), and therefore its pile is rather dense. The exact origin of this unique carpet is unknown. There is a version of its Iranian provenance. But perhaps it was produced in Central Asia through which the contacts of ancient Altaians with Iran and the Near East took place. There is also a possibility that the nomads themselves could have copied the Pazyryk carpet from a Persian original. Source: Hermitage Museum (https://www.hermitagemuseum.org/wps/portal/hermitage/digital-collection/25.+Archaeological+Artifacts/879870/)</ref> and an even earlier fragment in tombs in Siberia revealed that the manufacture of knotted-pile carpets is of far greater antiquity than had previously been supposed.<ref>see vi, below</ref> The oldest previously known pile carpets were manufactured in Anatolia in the 7-8th/13-14th centuries<ref>Denny, p. 23</ref>. With the exception of several fragments from Sasanian levels at Shahr-e Qumis<ref>see vi, below</ref> and possibly of a fragmentary lion carpet recently purchased by the De Young Museum in San Francisco<ref>see vii, below</ref> no Persian pile carpet can definitely be said to survive from before the 10th/16th century<ref>Hubel, p. 160</ref>. There is literary evidence for the existence of carpets in western Asia from pre-Islamic times<ref>cf. Edwards, pp. 2-3; cf. vii, below</ref>, but it is impossible to say whether or not they were knotted. The famous jeweled garden carpet of Ḵosrow I at Ctesiphon was almost certainly not a pile carpet but a flat weave or an embroidery<ref>BAHĀR-E KESRĀ “The spring of Ḵosrow” (Ṭabarī), Farš-e zamestānī “Winter carpet” (Baḷʿamī), or Bahārestān “Spring garden” (Ḥabīb al-sīar), a huge, late Sasanian royal carpet. The carpet measured 60 cubits (araš, ḏerāʿ) square (ca. 27 m x 27 m), that may have covered the floor of the great audience hall (Ayvān-e Kesrā) at the winter capital of Madāʾen. Representations of paths and streams were embroidered on it with gems against a ground of gold. Its border was embroidered with emeralds to represent a cultivated green field in which were flowering spring plants with fruit embroidered with different colored gems on stalks of gold with gold and silver flowers and silk foliage. It was used as a place to drink, as if in gardens, when the winter winds blew. The Ḥabīb al-sīar explains that when one sat on it in winter, it was as if it was spring. When Madāʾen fell to the Muslims in 16/637 this carpet was too heavy for the Persians to carry away so it was taken with the other booty. The Muslims called it al-qeṭf “the picked” and, since it was left over after Saʿd b. Abī Waqqāṣ divided the booty, he sent it to ʿOmar in Medina. Although the assembly agreed that ʿOmar should use his own judgment in disposing of it, ʿAlī was concerned lest someone be deprived of a rightful share in the future; so ʿOmar cut it up and divided it among the Muslims. Although ʿAlī did not receive one of the best pieces, he sold his for 20,000 dirhams. Source: Encyclopædia Iranica</ref>; a pile carpet of the size described (ca. 27 m square) would probably have weighed more than two tons<ref>cf. Edwards, p. 2</ref>.<br>

According to Kurt Erdmann<ref>Kurt Erdmann (9 September 1901, in Hamburg – 30 September 1964, in Berlin) was a German art historian who specialized in Sasanian and Islamic Art. He is best known for his scientific work on the history of the Oriental rug, which he established as a subspecialty within his discipline. From 1958 to 1964, Erdmann served as the director of the Pergamon Museum, Berlin. He was one of the protagonists of the "Berlin school" of Islamic art history. Source: Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Erdmann)</ref>, Oriental carpets were not regularly imported into Europe before the end of the 7th/13th century.<ref>Survey of Persian Art, p. 3160</ref> At about that time European artists began to depict such carpets in their paintings; Giotto (ca. 1266-1337) seems to have been the first<ref>Sylvester, p. 4; cf. Erdmann, 1970, pp. 17-20, 47-51</ref>. Most of the carpets depicted are thought to be Turkish, however, not Persian; it was generally quicker, easier, and cheaper to import carpets into western Europe from Anatolia than from Persia as, especially during the Safavid period, the Ottoman Empire, which controlled the traditional overland routes from Persia to the west, was periodically at war with the Persian state. Carpets of presumed Persian design are nevertheless to be found in the paintings of Mantegna (1435-1506), Van Dyck (1599-1641), and Rubens (1577-1640); in fact, in the 17th century some seventy Dutch artists included representations of Persian carpets in their paintings, mainly types originating in northwestern Persia<ref>Mills, pp. 32-34; see ix, below</ref>. Oriental carpets and rugs purchased by Europeans were, of course, often too valuable to be laid on the floor, as had been the practice in the Orient since earliest times. Terms used in Venetian inventories indicate that Oriental rugs were placed on tables<ref>tapedi da Desco; taped da tavola</ref> and on chests that also served as seats<ref>tapedi da casa; Erdmann, in Surveyor Persian Art, p. 3161</ref>, and European paintings confirm such uses<ref>e.g., L. Bassano, “Portrait of a Senator,” late 16th century; King and Sylvester, p. 18, fig. 13</ref>.<br>

According to Kurt Erdmann<ref>Kurt Erdmann (9 September 1901, in Hamburg – 30 September 1964, in Berlin) was a German art historian who specialized in Sasanian and Islamic Art. He is best known for his scientific work on the history of the Oriental rug, which he established as a subspecialty within his discipline. From 1958 to 1964, Erdmann served as the director of the Pergamon Museum, Berlin. He was one of the protagonists of the "Berlin school" of Islamic art history. Source: Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Erdmann), See also: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/erdmann</ref>, Oriental carpets were not regularly imported into Europe before the end of the 7th/13th century.<ref>Survey of Persian Art, p. 3160</ref> At about that time European artists began to depict such carpets in their paintings; Giotto (ca. 1266-1337) seems to have been the first<ref>Sylvester, p. 4; cf. Erdmann, 1970, pp. 17-20, 47-51</ref>. Most of the carpets depicted are thought to be Turkish, however, not Persian; it was generally quicker, easier, and cheaper to import carpets into western Europe from Anatolia than from Persia as, especially during the Safavid period, the Ottoman Empire, which controlled the traditional overland routes from Persia to the west, was periodically at war with the Persian state. Carpets of presumed Persian design are nevertheless to be found in the paintings of Mantegna (1435-1506), Van Dyck (1599-1641), and Rubens (1577-1640); in fact, in the 17th century some seventy Dutch artists included representations of Persian carpets in their paintings, mainly types originating in northwestern Persia<ref>Mills, pp. 32-34; see ix, below</ref>. Oriental carpets and rugs purchased by Europeans were, of course, often too valuable to be laid on the floor, as had been the practice in the Orient since earliest times. Terms used in Venetian inventories indicate that Oriental rugs were placed on tables<ref>tapedi da Desco; taped da tavola</ref> and on chests that also served as seats<ref>tapedi da casa; Erdmann, in Surveyor Persian Art, p. 3161</ref>, and European paintings confirm such uses<ref>e.g., L. Bassano, “Portrait of a Senator,” late 16th century; King and Sylvester, p. 18, fig. 13</ref>.<br>

Beginning with the Safavid period large quantities of pile carpets survive, but the dating and attribution of these and later examples to particular weaving centers are pitfalls for the unwary<ref>see ix, x, below</ref>. Some general observations are relevant, however. First, of an estimated total of between 1,500 and 2,000 surviving Safavid carpets only five are dated<ref>Edwards, p. 7; Spuhler, p. 701</ref>. The number is greater from the Qajar and Pahlavi periods<ref>see xi, xiii, below</ref>, yet, even when a carpet is dated, careful examination is necessary to ensure that the date has not been tampered with<ref>Ittig, 1981, pp. 125-27</ref>. Carpet inscriptions can nevertheless provide invaluable information on craftsmen, places of manufacture, patrons, and so on; furthermore, once a particular carpet has been firmly fixed in time and place, it can be used to identify other structurally related pieces<ref>Ittig, 1981, pp. 125-27; cf. ix, below</ref>. Arthur Upham Pope pointed out that parallel designs can frequently also be found in architectural decoration, which can be useful in dating and localizing carpets<ref>Survey of Persian Art, p. 2268</ref>.<br>

Beginning with the Safavid period large quantities of pile carpets survive, but the dating and attribution of these and later examples to particular weaving centers are pitfalls for the unwary<ref>see ix, x, below</ref>. Some general observations are relevant, however. First, of an estimated total of between 1,500 and 2,000 surviving Safavid carpets only five are dated<ref>Edwards, p. 7; Spuhler, p. 701</ref>. The number is greater from the Qajar and Pahlavi periods<ref>see xi, xiii, below</ref>, yet, even when a carpet is dated, careful examination is necessary to ensure that the date has not been tampered with<ref>Ittig, 1981, pp. 125-27</ref>. Carpet inscriptions can nevertheless provide invaluable information on craftsmen, places of manufacture, patrons, and so on; furthermore, once a particular carpet has been firmly fixed in time and place, it can be used to identify other structurally related pieces<ref>Ittig, 1981, pp. 125-27; cf. ix, below</ref>. Arthur Upham Pope pointed out that parallel designs can frequently also be found in architectural decoration, which can be useful in dating and localizing carpets<ref>Survey of Persian Art, p. 2268</ref>.<br>

The attribution of a carpet made before the late 13th/19th century to a particular place of manufacture is even more hazardous than dating. Friedrich Spuhler declares bluntly that assumptions about the origins of Safavid carpets “which have gained credence over the years are purely hypothetical”<ref>p. 704</ref>, and E. Gans- Ruedin concurs: “Too few written sources are at our disposal today to enable light to be thrown upon the making of any given carpet. For this reason, the method of attribution to a specific production center, used for more than half a century, with a few exceptions, is unreliable. Perhaps the time will come when documents will come to light that will allow us to ascertain the exact provenance of some rugs from the 16th and 17th centuries. Meanwhile, it is possible to formulate hypotheses only”<ref>p. 28</ref>. In the few instances in which a master craftsman has woven his name into the carpet, it would be rash to assume that his nesba<ref>attributive name</ref> indicates the place where the carpet was manufactured. Yet only recently have scholars become more conservative about attributing specific carpets to specific manufacturing centers<ref>see ix, x, below</ref>.<br>

The attribution of a carpet made before the late 13th/19th century to a particular place of manufacture is even more hazardous than dating. Friedrich Spuhler declares bluntly that assumptions about the origins of Safavid carpets “which have gained credence over the years are purely hypothetical”<ref>p. 704</ref>, and E. Gans- Ruedin concurs: “Too few written sources are at our disposal today to enable light to be thrown upon the making of any given carpet. For this reason, the method of attribution to a specific production center, used for more than half a century, with a few exceptions, is unreliable. Perhaps the time will come when documents will come to light that will allow us to ascertain the exact provenance of some rugs from the 16th and 17th centuries. Meanwhile, it is possible to formulate hypotheses only”<ref>p. 28</ref>. In the few instances in which a master craftsman has woven his name into the carpet, it would be rash to assume that his nesba<ref>attributive name</ref> indicates the place where the carpet was manufactured. Yet only recently have scholars become more conservative about attributing specific carpets to specific manufacturing centers<ref>see ix, x, below</ref>.<br>