Bibliography: Alcouffe, Daniel, ed., Great Carpets of the World, Chp.IV, The Carpets of Safavid Persia: Gardens of Earthly Delight, Paris, 1996, No.101, pg.130.
Bennet, Ian, ‘The Emperors’ old carpets’, Hali, July-August-September, 1986, pp.11-19
Denny, Walter B. ‘Textiles and Carpets in the Metropolitan Museum's New ALTICALSA Galleries’. Arts of Asia 2012 (2012). p. 105, ill. figs. 7, 8. Provenance of Emperor Carpet Czar Peter the Great, Russia (by tradition, until 1698); Austrian Imperial House, Vienna (1698–1921); Österreichisches Museum für Kunst und Industrie (1921–25; to Cardinal and Harford); [Cardinal and Harford, London, 1925–28; sale, Christie, Manson & Wood, London, July 5, 1928, no. 146]; [ International Art Gallery, London, 1928, sold to Arthur U. Pope for Rockefeller McCormick]; Edith Rockefeller McCormick, Chicago (1928–d. 1932; her estate until 1943; sold to Arthur U. Pope for the Metropolitan Museum of Art).
Denny, Walter B, How to Read Islamic Carpets. New Haven and London: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2014.p.118, illus. pp. 120-121, figs. 104-105.
Denny, Walter B, ‘Emperor’s carpet’, Hali, Issue 170, Winter 2011 , pp.74-75.
Ekhtiar, Maryam, Sheila R. Canby, Navina Haidar, and Priscilla P. Soucek, ed. Masterpieces from the Department of Islamic Art in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 1st ed. ed. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2011. no. 181, pp. 6,12,17, 172, 259-261, ill. p. 260 (color), fig. 18 (b/w).
Ellis, Charles, Oriental Carpets in the Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia,1988. p. 171.
Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Some Compartment Designs for Carpets, and Herat’, Textile Museum Journal 1, no. 4 (December 1965), pp. 42–56, pp. 42, 43, figs. 1, 2, and p. 52, fig. 15. Franses, Michael, Curator of exhibition and catalogue, Il Giardino del Paradiso nel tappeto “del tigri” del Museo Poldi Pezzoli e nei tappet persiani del XVI secolo (The Garden of Paradise in the Poldi Pezzoli Museum ‘ Tiger’ Carpet and in 16th century Persian Carpets, Exhibition, 23rd May – 1st September 2014, Poldi Pezzoli Museum, Milan, pp.1-80, Darius of the World ‘Tiger Carpet’, Tavola 4, p.11, p.42-49, 75-77.
Franses, Michael, ‘Out of the shadow’, Hali, Issue 179, Spring 2014, pp.80-85, for discussion on the Darius of the Universe carpet in the Poldi Pozzoli Museum, Milan.
Klose, Klose, ICOC paper presented in Istanbul, 2007 and posthumously published ‘Imperial Puzzle, Sixteenth-century Persian spiral vine carpets with animals’, Hali, Issue 170, Winter 2011 , pp.76-85.
Pope, Arthur Upham, A Survey of Persian Art: from Prehistoric times to the present, Vol. VIII, plates 981-1275, Textiles, Carpets, Oxford University Press, London & New York, 1939, vii, East Persia, floral and animal carpet, pl. 1174 (b/w - section of floral and animal carpet, East Persia, 2nd quarter 16th century, Estate of Mrs. Rockefeller McCormick. (L.whole carpet) 24ft 8 in (750cm). W. 10ft 6 in (320cm).
Sarre, Friedrich, and Trenkwald, Hermann, Alt Orientalische Teppiche, Leipzig, 1926-1929, Vol. I, Vol. II. Pl.29.
Welch, Stuart Cary. The Islamic World. Vol. 11. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1987. pp. 98-100, ill. fig. 74 (colour).
![1]()
![1-0]()
![1-1]()
![1-2]()
![1-3]()
Lot 58. A pashmina cartouche compartment rug, probably Srinagar, Kashmir, late 19th-early 20th century; approximately 123 by 81cm; 4ft., 2ft. 8in. Estimate 18,000 — 25,000 GBP. Courtesy Sotheby's 2018.
Knot density: V: 22-23/cm; H: 18/cm; silk foundation; after a Safavid compartment design, of superlative fineness, probably intended as an exhibition piece
Provenance: Sotheby’s, London, 13th April 1988, lot 84.
Note: The compartment distinctive design of the present rug, with its interlocking geometric star pattern comprised of radiating cartouches, enclosing and exotic animals, such as dragons, simurghs, Ch’i lins and phoenixes, incorporates design elements taken from Chinese and Islamic motifs. It is inspired by two recorded examples in museum collections, both from Central Iran, 15th or early 16th century, and considered to have originally been a pair. The first comparable is a complete carpet known as ‘The Baron Compartment with Dragon and Phoenix Carpet’, (800 by 400cm), wool pile on a silk foundation, in the Musée Historique des Tissus, Lyon, no.25.423 (Formerly S. Baron, Paris, 1893), and the other comparable originally woven from the same cartoon, is ‘The Robinson Compartment with Dragon and Phoenix Carpet’, first half 16thcentury, Iran (possibly Tabriz), (reduced in size 497 by 340cm), wool pile on silk foundation, asymmetrically knotted, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (Frederick C. Hewitt Fund, 1910 -10.61.3). Similarities to the Safavid bookbindings have been noted, in the format and in the use of the Chinese cloud bands and Islamic cartouches as motif elements. The offered miniature rug is likely to be from an extraordinary group of 20th century Indian weavings. It has been executed with extraordinary dexterity, with a high knot count and small scale of the motifs. The presence of the pashmina wool suggests a Kashmir origin. The presence of elephants within the curvilinear compartments against the dark brown ground in the design may well be an Indian adaptation, for in the cited 16th century examples the same compartments have a spotted wild cat motif . The present rug is a copy of the shortened carpet in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
For comparable miniature compartment rugs, see Sotheby’s, London, 20th October 1993, lot 97, probably 1930 (105 by 79cm), knot density V 17-19/cm: H 16/cm, and another example with a finer knot count, in the same auction, Sotheby’s, London, 20th October 1993, lot 109, after 1928, (129 by 75cm), knot density V 19-20/cm: H 18/cm This piece also had a label stating that it was made by Mohd Rahim for C.M. Hadow & Co. in Srinagar, in Kashmir, which was a factory know particularly for copies of Polonaise rugs. Carpets of this group are represented by their extremely high knot counts (V 15-16/cm: H 18/cm). The Metropolitan carpet was first illustrated by John Kimberley Mumford, in The Yerkes Collection of Oriental Carpets, 1910, pl.XXV, and the Lyon example was published in 1900 by the director of the museum, Raymond Cox. It was then possible to produce cartoons, and a number of copies were produced in different locations, including several factories in India, and they were possibly produced in jail or private workshops, in Agra, Lahore and Amritsar. It was noted in government sponsored reports on Indian weaving in the late 19th and early 20th century, of the occasional use of pashmina wool at this date, and that examples are ‘excessively rare’ (see Marketplace, Hali, 39, pp.92-93). It is highly probably that this piece was intended as an exhibition piece.
For a carpet offered in this sale, taken from the design of a famous pair of 16th century Persian, known as 'The Emperors' carpets', see lot 62.
Bibliography: Ian Bennett, ‘Splendours in the City of Silk, Hali, Issue 32, 1986, pp.42-48; Ian Bennett, ‘Splendours in the City of Silk, part 2 ‘The Safavid Masterpieces’, Hali, Issue 33, 1987, pp.38-49 and Ian Bennett, ‘Splendours in the City of Silk, part 3: ‘The Safavid Masterpieces’, Hali, Issue 34, 1987, pp.42-43, pl.XI, and p.103 (with structure analysis);
Brown‚ David J, ‘Carpets from the Hadow Factory in Kashmir’, Hali, 3/3, 1981, p.219;
Erdmann, Seven Hundred Years of Oriental Carpets, London, 1970, p.182, pl. XIX (detail);
Klose, Christine, ‘Traces of Timurid carpets in contemporary and later carpets from the Near East, pp.72-89, p.72, fig.1, frontispiece, & Safavid carpets with cartouche patterns, pp.82-86, fig. 26, Thompson, Jon, Shaffer, Daniel, Mildh, Pirjetti, (ed), Carpets and Textiles in the Iranian World 1400-1700, Proceedings of the Conference held at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 30-31 August 2003, for The May Beattie Archive, Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford, in association with The Bruschettini Foundation for Islamic and Asian Art, Genoa, 2010;
Mumford, John Kimberley, The Yerkes Collection of Oriental Carpets, 1910, pl. XXV.
![1]()
![1-0]()
![1-1]()
![1-2]()
Lot 63. From the Alexander Collection. A Khorossan carpet fragment, Northeast Persia, 17th century; overall dimensions of fragment approximately 249 by 68cm; 8ft. 2in., 2ft. 3in. Estimate 7,000 — 10,000 GBP. Courtesy Sotheby's 2018.
Provenance: acquired from Eskenazi Ltd, London, 1984
Literature: Bennett, I., 'The Alexander Collection: Part II A carpet is a Picture of God', Hali, April/May 1994, issue 74, p. 93, fig. 10.
Alexander, C., A Foreshadowing of 21st Century Art The Color and Geometry of Very Early Turkish Carpets, New York, 1993, pp. 238 - 239, ill pp. 13 (detail) & 239.
Eskenazi. J., Il tappeto orientale dal XV al XVIII secolo, London, 1982, pp. 28, tavaola. 46.
Related Literature: McMullan, Joseph, Islamic Carpets, New York, 1965, pp. 164 – 172, plate. 41
Note: The immediate vibrancy of this fragment is staggering, so much so that Alexander places it as early as at least late 14thcentury due to the spectacular colouring and Ian Bennett singles it out in his article, op cit, p. 93. Alexander cites the Tabriz carpet which he believes to be a century later than the offered lot but ‘is readily’ accepted as 15th century. See Alexander, op cit, p. 121, Sotheby’s London, 7 November 2017, lot 78, catalogued as 16th century. He however owns that there are others, Eskenazi included, who assign it as 17th century and so within the chronological ordering of the book it appears later than the Tabriz– Alexander, ibid, p. 239 and Eskenzi, op cit, pp. 46 & 47. Faced with the other works within the Alexander Collection it should be somewhat acknowledged that dating becomes both complicated and less relevant, than perhaps with other works, with these extraordinary unusual and colourful pieces. With this in mind we have catalogued it as 17th century, in keeping with contemporaneous viewpoints and ascribed Khorossan as the weaving centre in accordance with the jufti knotting, but do acknowledge this fragment could be older than this dating.
There is a companion piece, almost certainly from the same carpet, recorded in the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities and both discussed and corroborated by Ian Bennett, op cit, pp. 93 & 94 and pictured Eskenazi, op cit, p. 47, fig. 3. In 2006 Daniel Walker discussed the Khorossan group in further depth in his review of the Textile Museum exhibition ‘Pieces of a Puzzle: Classical Persian Carpet Fragments’ and cites a number of examples. Three of which, at that time, were in private collections and share some similar motifs and colours to the present lot; notably the red outlining to the motifs and the vibrant white ‘hand-like’ palmettes, see Walker. D., ‘Carpets of Khorasan’ Hali, November –December 2006, issue 149. pp. 72 - 77, figs. 5, 7 & 8.
![1-3]()
Fig. 1. The ‘Niğde’ Carpet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, accession no 56.217, formerly in the collection of Joseph McMullan.
![1-4]()
Fig. 2. The ‘Niğde’ Carpet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, accession no 56.217, formerly in the collection of Joseph McMullan, (detail).
Perhaps the most compelling of comparisons is the so called ‘Niğde Carpet’ formerly in the McMullan collection and now in the Metropolitan Museum, New York, figs 1 & 2. This carpet was initially catalogued as Caucasian, see McMullan, J., Islamic Carpets, New York, 1965, pp. 164 – 172, plate. 41, but now is attributed to Northwest Persia, accession no 56.217. Under inspection the ‘Niğde’ becomes more symbiotic with the present lot: in the use of white ‘hand-like’ palmettes, field rosettes, saz leaf design, bright yellows and blues, the red cloudbands encapsulated in a lozenge with outline centred by open rosettes. The design layout of these works is near identical and it is possible that they were drawn from the same cartoon even though their border designs are entirely different.
![1]()
![1-0]()
![1-1]()
![1-2]()
![1-3]()
Lot 21. A Yomut main carpet, West Turkestan, first half 19th century; with 'kepse' güls, approximately 311 by 172cm; 10ft. 2in., 2ft. 4in. Estimate 8,000 — 12,000 GBP. Courtesy Sotheby's 2018.
Note: The present Yomut main carpet, or khali, presents a number of highly unusual traits for this particular group of weavings. For example ‘sheaf’, or kepse, güls are often seen within the group, but the arrangement of diagonal rows in three colourways - blue, green and then white - is more unusual and lends additional dynamism to the field. A simpler arrangement of white alternating with a colour is more usual, see Mackie. L., Thompson. J. (ed.), Turkmen Tribal Carpets and Traditions, Washington 1980, pp. 153 & 155, pl. 65. The border design is also uncommon and seems to draw inspiration from a number of other Turkmen sources. For example the hooked and stepped güls can also be seen in the border guards of Tekke Torbas, examples can be seen Mackie. L., Thompson. J. (ed.), ibid, pp. 108 & 109, pls. 36 & 37, and sometimes in Chodor main carpets, p. 122. One Yomut main carpet shares a related border design and again published, ibid, p.156, pl. 67, and an example with similar meandering serrated vines sold Christie’s London, 26 October 2017, lot 270. However the inclusion of the ‘C’ gül motifs within the border of the present lot is extremely unusual, although they are sometimes found within the kepse güls of main carpets. Two further irregularities can be noted in the present lot: the first the employment of an elem design more associated with Yomut Ensis, see Loges. W., Turkoman Tribal Rugs, New York, 1980, pp. 78 & 79, pl. 40. The other is the charming inclusion of the chequerboard motif in the corner of one elem.
Sotheby's. Rugs and Carpets: Including Distinguished Collections, London, 23 Apr 2018, 02:30 PM