Afshar Rugs and Textiles, Part 2

This is the second part of a three-part virtual presentation of a Textile Museum program on Afsar rugs and textiles conducted by Austin Doyle and Michael Seidman.

It is likely advisable to read through Austin’s lecture in Part 1 since it provides context for the illustrative pieces in this part.  Here is the link to that lecture:

https://rjohnhowe.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/afshar-rugs-and-textiles-part-1/

A third part is devoted to piece participants brought in.  This link takes you to Part 3:

https://rjohnhowe.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/afshar-rugs-and-textiles-part-3/

Austin and Michael had brought a number of Afsar pieces

AustinandMichael1

arrayed on the front-of-the-room board.

Michael began, preliminarily, with some older pieces Harold Keshishian had brought that were possibly relatable to Afshar weaving.

The first of these preliminary pieces was the mounted shawl fragment below.

AM1

Here are some closer details of this piece.

AM1a

The botehs are on a silk ground.

Am1b

Harold estimated this fragment to the 18th century.

AM1c

It is not clear whether this fragment is from an Indian or a Persian shawl, but Kerman shawls (and this is the possible link to our Afshar topic) were noteworthy and are thought by some to compete favorably with the more famous Indian shawls of Kashmir.

A second piece that Harold brought WAS a shawl from Kerman.

AM2

Here are some closer details of this colorful piece.

AM2a

AM2b

Its stripes with their finely detailed ornamentation are reminiscent of the similarly colorful and embroidered pantaloons of Zoroastrian women.

A third piece that Harold had brought was the Kerman brocade below.

AM3

Harold dated this richly textured textile to 1750 and said that it had been reconstituted from several pieces.

Here are some closer details.

AM3a

AM3b

AM3c

You may recall that we saw some other images of this fine piece in our virtual treatment of the textiles at a party that Harold and Melissa held during the holiday season in 2008

Harold had also brought in an image of Nader Shah, the great Afshar military leader and somewhat less distinguished ruler of Persia in the mid-18th century.

AMearlypicture

Michael treated the material on the board, beginning with a series of Afshar bags with botehs used prominently in their designs.

The first such piece was a complete khorjin set.

AM4

This piece was attributed to Afshars in southwest Iran.

Notice that the botehs in its respective field areas are reflected so as to be seen upright on both sides when the khorjin is in use.

Here are some closer details.

First of the bridge, with chevron designs common to many SW Persian tribal groups.

AM4b

And then of a corner of its lower half.

AM4c

The back of this piece is a plain, brownish shade.

The next piece was a single khorjin face with a rural version of the boteh device.

AM5

The effect is subtle because of the close colors, but notice the diagonal use of color in its botehs leaning to the right.

Here is a closer look at one corner.

AM5a

I mentioned from the audience that Afshars often seem to have a distinctive blue in their palette and Austin and Michael agreed that there seems an identifiable Afshar color palette.

The next piece was the smaller bag face below.

AM6

The scale of the botehs in this piece are somewhat larger and add to its appeal, as does the framing effect of its white ground main border.  The spiky floral meander of the white border is very characteristic of Afshar weaving.

The next piece was a khorjin face of the more usual size.

AM7

Notice again the use of the distinctive blue mentioned above. The intricacy of the designs around the closure system draws attention.

AM7a

Here is a closer, more comprehensive look at this upper right corner.

AM7b

The next piece was the interesting bag face below.

AM8

Here, an effective striped border frames a field with large-scale, instrument botehs, alternating with forcefully colored armatures.

AM8b

AM8a

The next “boteh” piece was a sizable rug.

AM9

As with the previous piece, colorful, instrumented botehs are placed in colums between a meandering lattice of substantial armatures.

AM9a

This piece was described as featuring “serrated leaf forms.” The heavy armatures alternate between sections that do seem to be clear plant forms to others that may well be also, but that seem nearly mechanical.

AM9b

The field is framed by two major borders. The outside one with its white ground is especially effective and quite characteristic of an Afshar border design.

The next piece was the very small bag below.

AM10

It was described as “finely woven” and its virtues are captured in this single image.

The following piece was a salt bag.

AM11

Skillful use of red and a yellow-orange enrich this piece, especially in areas where is is combined with a dark ground.

AM11a

Note that the lattice of the field emphasizes the rectilinear while both the forms inside that lattice and the main border move toward the curviliner.

The design combinations used in the top opening-flap are unusual.

AM11b

Again, there is a rectilinear-curvilinear field-border contrast, but this time is it reversed.

The bag of this salt bag is also unusual

AM11back

Attractive striped flatweave is combined with a pile treatment of the opening-flap similar to be distinctive from that of the front.

The next piece was a classic, published Afshar rug, now locally owned, but once in the Ralph Yohe collection.  Rugs with this “tulip” design are thought to include some of the oldest known Afshar rugs.

AM12

Multiple sets of four richly drawn tulips are opposed on a dark blue field and bracketed by an intricate lattice.

AM12b

Three smaller scale borders frame the dramatic field without competing with it.

AM12a

This design is seen to be drawn from the shawl tradition and a dealer in the room said it looked Kerman to him.

There were some other examples of this “tulip” design in the room. The piece below

AM13

was this khorjin face (closure slits at the bottom in this image).

Here is a sightly closer look.

AM13a

A third piece with this “tulip” design field was a small rug.

AM14

A distinctive white-ground main border with polychrome medallions frames its field.

Here are some details of it.

AM14a

AM14b

AM14c

The next piece was the large rug below with a field of diagonals.

AM15

The colorful diagonals a composed of abstracted plant forms. The main border is an Afshar striped usage.

AM15a

There was some question about whether this rug was an Afshar. Some thought that this rug, which had somewhat darker warp threads, might be from Fars province.

The next piece has a distinctive zigzag field design.

AM16

It was seen to be a Sirjan valley town rug, with depressed warps and a stiff handle, woven in the early 20th century.

Here is a closer corner detail.

AM16a

And one that shows its “stars and blossums” field devices.

AM16b

The next piece was the small bag below.

AM17

Its field features a large star and a number of smaller stars in background.

This time the zigzag designs are on the back.

AM17b

And on the small panels between the slits in the closure system on the pile side.

AM17a

The next piece was another khorjin with star devices arranged diagonally.

AM18

Here is a closer top center detail, showing the decoration of the closure system area.

AM18a

There was some question about whether this piece is Afshar or Khamseh.

A further piece was the rug below.

AM19

This piece has seven or eight borders.

Here is a closer detail of one lower corner.

AM19a

And his is a closer look at its field devices.

AM19b

This rug was seen to be a city product.

The next was also a rug, this time a three-medallion design.

AM20

It has brown wool warps and a “eye-dazzler” field design surrounding its medallions,

AM20a

and a subtle. but well instrumented, system of borders that frame the field effectively.

AM20b

The careful composition and controlled execution of this piece suggests that it was woven following a cartoon.

We next turned to another khorjin face.

AM21

It has larger-scale floral-like devices in its field.

AM21b

The stark white of its border contrasts dramatically with the strong colors of the field.

AM21a

The colors of this piece are strong and beautiful.

AM21c

Despite its careful composition, the spacious drawing of the main border design projects, for me, an unusual vitality.

In my view this khorjin face is one of the best of an aesthetically strong group of pieces presented in this session.

The next piece was a pile panel AM22

with Memling guls.

AM22a

It has the shape and size of a Turkmen torba, but its border systems seem Persianate.

AM22b

It could conceivably be a side panel of a small, pile cargo-bag type mafrash but that, too, could be questioned.

The next piece had a single Memling gul

AM23a

but this time it occurred on a salt bag.

AM23

The colorful bag face below was attributed to the Fars province.

AM24

It “chickens” might suggest a Khamseh weaver, but it has white warps and a distinctive border that might license an Afshar attribution.

AM24a

The next two piece were khorjin faces with similar designs.  The first khorjin face has a field of tiny boteh and a very fine weave.

AM25and26

These field designs are very similar to those sometimes seen on pieces attributed to the Qashqua’i.

Here is a closer look at details of the first one.

AM25a

And here is a detail of an upper corner of the second one.

AM26a

It was thought that both of these pieces are probably Afshar, with their white warps and characteristic borders.

The next piece was the rug below.

AM27

This rug was described as a rustic version of a “vase” design.

It has a camel hair field, which is unusual for Afshar production.

AM27a

and an asymmetric knot.

AM27c

The vase designs have the appearance of faces.  A local rug dealer of Persian extraction claimed that the faces were intentionally drawn and representated “div” or demons.  Here is a closer detail of its side border systems.

AM27b

The following piece was the rug below.

AM28

It features a large central stepped medallion.

AM28b

AM28c

It was described as having a classic Afshar design.

Here is a closer look at a lower corner of it, with a classic Afshar spandrel design.

AM28a

The next piece was, to my mind, one of the prettiest rugs of the day.

AM29Austinholding

AM29

This is a Kerman area city rug with a lovely boteh white border.

Its indigo field effectively recedes to give the impression that its center medallion

AM29c

and corner devices

AM29a

AM29b

“float” on it.

It has an asymmetric knot open to the right and “vase” motifs. It was estimated to have been woven in the 3rd quarter of the 19th century.

The next piece was yet another rug.

AM30

It was described as having a “medallion and vase” field design.

AM30c

AM30d

Its reds are from madder.

And it has “niche” spandrels.

AM30a

AM30b

Its knot is asymmetric open to the right. It was estimated to have been woven about 1900, but had classic Afshar colors of peach, electric blue, and a strong green.

The last piece among those that Austin and Michael had brought in was the one below.

AM31

Here are closer looks at its field.

AM31b

AM31c

Among its colors are an apricot and a peach shade.

It has star medallion corners.  The 2-1-2 design of the medallions in the field may be a more archaic version of the medallion and spandrel design seen in the other rugs of this design, shown above.

AM31a

The knot is asymmetric open to the right. It was estimated to have been woven in the 19th century.

Perhaps its most interesting feature is that it exhibits “lazy lines.”

AM31f

AM31eback

This rug appears to have the weave, colors, and lazy lines described as characteristic of “outback” Afshars, in the Hali article by Tom Cole, and certainly does have a primitive and archaic appearance to its drawing.

Folks in the audience had brought in a number of related pieces.  They can be seen in Part 3.  Here, again, is the concluding link to that material:

https://rjohnhowe.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/afshar-rugs-and-textiles-part-3/


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: