The Joy of Fragments: Tim Hays, Ali Aydn, and Wendel Swan, Part 2, the Fragments Brought In
This is Part 2 of an RTAM given by Tim Hays, Ali Aydn and Wendel Swan. This program began with a lecture conducted by Tim Hays. If you have not seen it you can at this link:
Tim also talked briefly about some of the books and catalogs that have treated fragments.
The first we have seen in the lecture. It is a book presenting a series of very old carpet fragments purchased in the 1930s in Cairo by Carl Johan Lamm. Although most of these fragments are small and often not in good condition, a number of them have not been published elsewhere. The Lamm book is seen as something every collector of carpet fragments should own.
A second piece is from Austria, entitled “Fetzen” and is by Kirdoek an admirer of fragments.
Penny Hays had translated a passage by Kirdoek into English.
(click on the passage below to get a more readable size font)
She and Tim also had a second short passage on fragments by their friend Erhard Stoeber a Viennese collector and painter.
A third publication the catalog for an exhibition by the Galerie Sailer in Salzburg, Austria in 1988.
This catalog is beautifully produced and treats nearly 50 wonderful kilim and pile carpet fragments with a text by Friedrich Spuhler.
A great many fragments had been brought in and Tim began with them now. He started with a piece from the Hays Family collection.
Tim said that this is an silk velvet applique design. It is an Ottoman-influenced European textile from a church in a town in Lower Austria (near the city of Graz). Tim believes that it might have been a altarpiece. The piece has been examined by Dr. Nurhan Atasoy who assessed it to be late 17th or early 18th Century.
Here are some details images of T1.
The next fragment was mounted and framed an Ottoman embroidery.
Here are some closer details of it.
A third piece was a contemporary reproduction, large, but with a yastik-like layout and Ottoman designs. Somewhat comparable in design and execution to T2. This piece was embroidered in Armenia.
Some details of it.
The next piece is a pre-Columbian Chancay textile fragment. Camelid fibers.
The next piece was a flat-woven fragmentary Chiprovtsy kilim from NW Bulgaria.
Tim said that this pattern is the oldest he knows that occurs on this type Balkan kilim. In a subsequent email conversation, he wrote: “
“This is a Chiprovtsy kilim from the town in NW Bulgaria where kilims are still made, According to Bulgarian scholars this design pattern is known as bakamsky or garabalda. The design originated in the Bulgarian Constructionist Period and is known to have originated in the 18th Century, The design must be older, as its also known from the same 18th Century time period in Wallachia (SE and Eastern Romania).
“The color palette of this piece is typical-brown, ochre, indigo blue, and green (blue over yellow).
“The production center for this kilim is the same as for the Thracian saf fragment. Chiprovtsy in NW Bulgaria. the colors are very similar, if more intense in the say (T8).
Here are detail images of T5.
The next piece was very large. In part, because it is two large pieces from the same flat weave. The original was very big indeed.
Interlocking tapestry, eccentric wefts and very good drawing. Made in a Serbian workshop.
The next piece was Anatalian kilim.
This fragment is of a famous “Yuncu” type woven in western Anatolia. Most of these pieces are red and blue. This one is darker than most because the ground color at the sides seems brown. This is a one-piece version of this design and is estimated to have been woven in the early 19th century.
Here are some details of this nice piece.
The next piece is the saf that Tim referred to in his comments on T5.
This large fragment was woven in Chiprovtsy in NW Bulgaria. More below but first look at the fabulous way in which this fragment has been mounted. It lets us see a bit what the original piece looked like.
Tim said that this saf was made for a mosque. Late 18th century, before the Ottomans left this area.
Dtails of T8.
The next fragment was small: a border from a Chiprovtsy piece.
Next was this Central Anatolian kilim. Nice colors. Possibly from the Aksaray area.
Some details of T10.
The next piece was described as a Konya kilim. Interesting colors. There was a long conversation at about this point about the impact of various backing colors. It was noted that Anatolian dealers seem always to prefer tan backings (as in the case of T11) but that some felt that different colors (often darker blue or black) highlight most pieces more effectively. Kilim books often present their pieces on a black ground page.
Details of T11.
T12 was described as western Anatolian, with an unusual design. Dated to the late 18th century. Published in Orient Stars. We believe it shows a link to both West Anatolian and Balkan weavings.
Details of T12.
Tim and Penny displayed the next piece, one from their collection.
It was a graphically dramatic Anatolian fragment, mounted on a stretcher. Central Anatolian, Cappadocia. Mid-19th century. Very good colors, including a purple.
Detail images of T13.
The next piece was a flat-woven Yomut Turkman text band.
This tent band at 25 feet is shorter than the more usual 44 feet and is so because it combines two different bands with this design. Twelve inches wide.
Details of T14.
The next piece was a fragment of a Central Asian item of clothing, likely a robe or coat (see yellow ground edge). It is so thin that it had to be mounted on red rather than black, because the latter “washes out” its design. This piece may be from a distinctive group, since it has blue wefts rather than the more frequent red ones in most Central Asian ikats. Elena Tsareva has said, repeatedly, with this fragment in her hands, that it is the oldest piece of Central Asian ikat of which she knows.
The next piece was, at 2.25 inches wide and 5.5 long, the smallest fragment of the day. Silk embroidery.
It is also an example of something that is whole, as made, but is a fragment because it is only part of a larger textile assembly. In this case it is the small connecting piece that holds the false sleeves together in a Turkman chirpy. Here is a yellow ground Turkman chirpy.
See the horizontal connecting piece in the upper center of the detail below.
From the smallest piece of the day we go to the largest.
It was bigger than the front display border but this image lets you see how skillfully its two pieces were mounted to show its original niche design.
It is composed of two large fragments of a very large 3.5 X 3 meter Pirot kilim (Sarkoy) from SE Serbia .It is estimated to have been woven in 1830 to 1850. The color palette is typical for this genre and age. The primary colors are quite saturated.
Here are a number of details of T17 to let you appreciate it. Very good color.
The next piece was a fragment from a Salor Turkman main carpet.
Notice the intensity of the ground red and the precise drawing of the “tauk naska” animal forms in the interior of the major guls. There are three reds in this piece.
Characteristic Salor border.
The next piece was a khorjin face in a familiar Qashqa’i rendition.
Detail of T19.
The piece below is a fragmented Middle Amu Dyra torba with an unusual ikat-influenced field design.
Details images of T20.
Interesting variations in the drawing of the devices used in the field.
Next was a very nice fragment of a small Kurdish bag face. Striking field. Effective use of both dark ground and white. The border is seen in some Kurdish flat-woven pieces.
Details of T21.
The next piece was a a very nice Kurdish rug, with St. Andrews’ Crosses in its field. Such rugs are usually 8 to 10 feet, so its fragmentary nature must be that it has been shortened. Its good range of color is wonderful. Effective use of white.
Details of T22.
The next piece is a Turkman chuval I own. As you can see, it’s badly damaged especially on the lower left corner. I’ve really only been able to display it for viewing by having sewn onto a backing.
Most will know that this would now be called a Middle Amu Dyra piece with a field design based on Uzbek ikat devices. I think it’s older, but can’t prove that.
Details of T23.
The simplicity of the “throat” of this gul and the use of bright blue are two things that make me think it may be older.
The next piece was bought out of a Jordanian flea market with the help of a friend in Amman. It is an instance in which mounting on a red backing, similar to the ground color of the rug, minimizes the holes in it.
It is Uzbek with two varieties of Memling guls. The first drawn positively,
and the second in the negative in between.
The next piece was one of those that was made whole but is fragmentary because it was part of a larger assembly, this time a Turkmen horse head decoration. Silk embroidery with lots of green
The next fragment was a large, heavy one. Full, deep pile, huge Memling guls and only a trace on one side of its borders. Sold to the owner as Zakatalan. About 3.5 x 7 feet.
The next piece was a fragment from a large Anatolian rug with a “Star Ushak” design. This is an example illustrating the fact that even a quite small piece of a large rug can be worth having and attractively displayed.
Complete rugs of this sort are 6-7 feet wide and 12-14 feet long.
The next piece was Kurdish. Damaged bit with good graphics and color.
Detail of T28
It is not possible to really see the merits of the next piece without magnification. It is a piece of exquisite Indian embroidery. Dated about 1725.
The last piece of the day was this fragment of a Middle Amu Dyra main carpet without its borders. Probably northern Afghanistan Turkman.
Tim took questions
and brought the session to a close and the after-session conversations started up.
Below are Tim and a friend who helps with AV in his presentations.
A closer look at Amy Rispin’s colorful, beaded belt.
I hope you have enjoyed this look at “The Joy of Fragments.”
R. John Howe