A Museum of Masterpieces - IBERIAN & EAST MEDITERRANEAN CARPETS IN THE MUSEUM OF ISLAMIC ART, DOHA

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

a

museum of

masterpieces MICHAEL FRANSES

2: IBERIAN & EAST MEDITERRANEAN CARPETS IN THE MUSEUM OF ISLAMIC ART, DOHA To date, the National Council for Culture, Arts & Heritage of the Emirate of Qatar has acquired five historical Spanish carpets and eight from Egypt and Syria for the new Museum of Islamic Art in Doha. It is these that are the focus of the second in our series of in-depth surveys of the MIAQ collection. An abridged version of this article, without references or citations, appears in HALI 157, Autumn 2008.

WITH THEIR EXTRAORDINARY BEAUTY, the product of striking juxtapositions of shimmering colour and complex but carefully balanced designs, over the past century the classical carpets of Spain, Egypt and Syria have been studied in great depth and avidly sought after by museums and private collectors alike.1 The Spanish and East Mediterranean carpets acquired by the National Council for Culture, Arts & Heritage (now the Qatar Museums Authority) represent a substantial holding, given that many of the earliest examples still extant – the most beautiful and those in the finest condition – were already in European and American museums by 1930. In the latter part of the 20th century the MIAQ has nevertheless been able to purchase a handful of wonderful pre-1600 carpets and fragments in good original pile with glowing colours that had remained in private hands, as well as other examples at auction. We should consider this small group as a nucleus to be built upon.

The pan-Mediterranean textile trade, including carpets, dates back to antiquity, but a strong local style can be seen in the few surviving Spanish carpets from the 14th and early 15th centuries.

Egyptian carpets from the second half of the 15th century and before also show relatively little outside inf luence.

The 15th century was a time of conquest and a period of

expansion in trade in the Mediterranean region. By the early 16th century, f loral Ottoman court designs, taken from textiles and ceramics made in western Anatolia, were beginning to inf luence carpet making in both Spain and Islamic North Africa.

In Spain such designs, in tandem with the stylistic inspiration of Spanish complex woven silk patterns, came to dominate carpet making, and they were also inf luential in Egypt. Carpet design in Syria, however, then still part of the Mamluk Empire, took on a so-called ‘international’ style, drawing on inf luences from Egypt, eastern Anatolia and Iran, that was to continue in use into the 17th century.

As the Ottomans looked west, expanding into the Balkans, Egypt and North Africa, their inclusive attitude to all peoples – provided they paid their taxes – made their Empire a centre for trade. The Spanish Inquisition and the expulsion of Spain’s Jews and Muslims did much to facilitate Mediterranean commerce, with networks of trading families resettled in different ports.

From the 13th to 15th century, Spanish carpets were being exported to France and Italy, and during the 15th and 16th Italy became the principal importer of carpets from Anatolia and Egypt. Many of the oldest surviving Syrian carpets can also be traced back to Renaissance Italy.

1 The Convent of Santa Ursula large octagon carpet (detail), Spain, 15th century. Museum of Islamic Art, Qatar, no.CA24.

HALI ISSUE 157 69

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS 2 The Convent of Santa Ursula large octagon carpet (lower part) Spain, 15th century. 1.03 x 2.50m (3'5" x 8'2"), Museum of Islamic Art, Qatar, no.CA24.

70 HALI ISSUE 157

SPANISH CARPETS Spanish carpets have been collected by some of the most sophisticated of connoisseurs,2 often acquired through specialist dealers in Spain, Italy, Germany, England and America.3 My research archive contains images of at least 260 knotted-pile carpets made in Spain before 1750, including fragments. Most examples are now in museum collections.4 The MIAQ has five knotted-pile Spanish carpets, one perhaps from the 15th century and four from the 16th. One is complete, two appear to be complete but are in fact part of larger carpets, and two are fragments. The museum has none of the later loopedpile carpets from Alpujarra, nor any of the rare knotted-pile or more common embroidered Arrialos carpets from Portugal.5 This tiny group obviously cannot properly represent the history of carpet-making in the Iberian Peninsula, but it does offer a glimpse of the carpet art of the region. To appreciate its significance and merit, and to comprehend the rarity and importance of Spanish carpet-making in general, we should brief ly consider the surviving corpus.

Most early Spanish carpets are made using a single warp with offset knotting, a technique that may have come to Spain from Egypt between the 8th and 10th centuries. A few pile carpet fragments from this early period woven entirely in this so-called ‘Spanish’ technique have been found in Fustat (old Cairo),6 although its origin is undoubtedly much earlier, as it occurs in combination with other techniques on some knotted-pile carpets from the 1st century AD found in Central Asia.7 R.B. Serjeant tells us of Arabic documents that mention carpet-making in Spain from the 10th century, although they do not say how rugs were constructed, and give little descriptive information.8 The ‘Spanish’ technique was also being used in central Europe by the 12th century, as can be seen from the large fragments of carpets in Halberstadt and Quedlinburg.9 Single warp offset knotting is less robust than other methods, so the finer and older Spanish carpets with short-cut pile tend to be easily worn, often torn, and are now mostly fragmented.

Cutting and patching occurred quite early on, as can be seen in two 15th century rugs depicted in 16th century European paintings.10 Today different parts of one carpet may be found in a number of different collections, and what seem to be complete carpets may have patches from one or more other examples.11 Spanish carpets were exported to many parts of Europe, and it is said that Eleanor of Castile introduced them to England in 1255.12 A carpet, probably Spanish, is depicted in a fresco from the first half of the 14th century in the Palace of the Popes in Avignon.13 Its field of rows of conjoined small octagons separated by diamonds, each octagon containing a single six-pointed star, resembles a number of surviving Spanish ‘Admiral’ carpets attributed to the late 14th and 15th centuries. Monique King reports that: “The property of Pope Clement V (reigned 1305–14) at Avignon included 54 pile carpets, and Pope John XXII is said to have had Spanish carpets with coats-of-arms in his apartments at Avignon. The Bishop of Langres owned a pile carpet of Spanish manufacture in 1395. The Duke of Berry had no fewer than 13 Spanish carpets, mostly white grounds… mostly 2.40 metres wide and 8.50 metres long.”14 Ferrandis Torres also lists many Spanish inventories that mention carpets from the 14th to 18th centuries in his important 1933 Madrid exhibition catalogue, Alfombras Antiguas Espanolas.15 The earliest almost complete Spanish carpet to survive, usually attributed to the 14th century, is in the Museum of Islamic Art in Berlin, acquired by Wilhelm Bode in Munich in 1884. Much has been written about it, and it has been convincingly suggested that it was ordered for a synagogue.16 Historical records exist of carpet making from the 12th century onward in Chinchilla, Cuenca, and Murcia, and from the 15th century in Letur, Liétor, Alcaraz, Salamanca and Granada.17 They tell us that Alcaraz was where Spanish rugs were sold, and that they were made in a number of small villages on a cottage

industry basis in the province of Albacete in the Murcia region.

These villages were probably inhabited by Mudejar Muslim weavers who stayed on after the Inquisition and into the second half of the 16th century. Today the labels ‘Alcaraz’ and ‘Cuenca’ are the most widely used, the former for finer 15th and 16th century examples, the latter for coarser late 16th to mid-18th century carpets. All the so-called ‘Alcaraz’ carpets seem to be remarkably similar in wool, handle, weave and dyes.

For classification purposes, I have divided Spanish carpets into groups representing basic field compositions rather than workshops or places of manufacture. The same can be done with border patterns, which can be seen associated with several different field designs.18 Among the oldest of surviving Spanish carpets, perhaps made from the late 14th or early 15th century until the early 16th, are those with field patterns composed of a small polygonal lattice.19 At least 27 examples are known to survive.20 They are commonly known as the ‘Admiral’ carpets, because the fields of some examples are overlaid with large escutcheons containing the coats-ofarms of the 15th century ‘Admirals’ of Spain.21 Inventories from the 14th century onward cite Spanish carpets bearing blazons.22 Several of these lattice-field carpets are up to nine metres in length and no more than 2.5 metres wide. Their fields are surrounded by between three and seven borders, including one composed of highly stylised Kufic script. On some carpets this kufesque border is filled with various creatures, trees and human figures, including women in low-cut European-style dresses, and at least two examples have a pictorial panel depicting trees and animals at each end.23 Similar geometric lattice borders and pictorial end panels are also seen on Spanish carpets with ‘Turkish’ field designs.24 Armorial blazons also appear on Spanish carpets with a number of different field designs throughout the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. Four examples, believed to be funeral carpets, have a central medallion with blazon and small medallions with skulls set against a textile pattern. At least nine others have blazons, some on a plain field, some with a decorated background. Spanish coats-of-arms often appear on carpets with imported field designs: two have border and spandrel designs taken directly from early 17th century west Anatolian originals, another copies a small Ushak rug with a cloudband border, and at least four have field designs taken directly from Anatolian arabesque or ‘Lotto’ design rugs.

‘TURKISH-STYLE’ SPANISH CARPETS Turkish carpet designs, in particular those from western Anatolia, inf luenced Spanish carpets most of all. The oldest surviving Spanish carpets with Turkish designs are attributed to the second or third quarters of the 15th century, but examples must have reached Spain by the 13th or 14th, as many Spanish ‘copies’ present an earlier version of Turkish designs than any surviving Anatolian rug.25 A Spanish carpet in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, has a ‘small-pattern Holbein’ field of rows of small interlaced medallions, commonly found on west Anatolian rugs from the 15th and 16th centuries. The primary medallions have perfect interlaced surrounds, the internal octagon within each octagon has an interlaced pattern, and the green-ground field is enclosed by a wide border of ‘Kufic’ motifs separated by large interlaced knots.26 A carpet with different small interlaced medallions is in the Textile Museum, Washington DC. Another example, surviving as four fragments, has a tile- or ceiling-like field composed of a rectangular interlaced grid, each compartment of which is filled with a large interlaced medallion; the colours and border pattern suggests that this probably dates from the late 15th or early 16th century.27 One of the most widely published of all 15th century Spanish carpets is in the Victoria & Albert Museum, London. With three perfectly balanced columns of ten small octagons of the type

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS found on 15th and 16th century Anatolian carpets, it has an intense red colour and is in perfect condition.28 Twenty Spanish carpets have a Turkish field composition consisting of of large octagons, usually known as the ‘largepattern Holbein design’ that appears on Anatolian and Syrian rugs depicted in a number of 15th and 16th century paintings by various artists, including Hans Holbein.29 Most of these carpets have a single large octagon placed in the centre of a large square or rectangular compartment or panel that is then repeated vertically, and often horizontally as well.

Carpets with this pattern can be further sub-divided according to the octagon design. The first sub-group comprises six carpets, all possibly from the second half of the 15th century, with a complex star medallion like that seen on an Anatolian rug depicted in 1486 by the Venetian artist Carlo Crivelli.30 The second, of which two carpets survive (one split between two collections), both probably early 16th century, has an interlaced medallion.

The third sub-group of large-octagon rugs, in which we find the secondary field ornament from the ‘small-pattern Holbein’ interlaced carpets at the centre of each octagon, is represented by a single surviving example, divided between three collections. The fourth sub-group, consisting of one complete carpet and one small fragment, has a field design of vertical and horizontal rows of octagons in implied compartments with small secondary motifs between.

There are at least nine carpets (one divided between two collections) in the fifth and final sub-group, which have ‘wheel’like medallions placed in the centre of each square shaped compartment. The type dates from the second half of the 15th century and an example can be seen depicted in a painting from around 1530.31 The MIAQ owns a most beautiful example of this last sub-group of Spanish ‘Holbein’ carpets, with three large octagons 1, 2. This substantial section is the lower part of the original long carpet; the upper part, with four octagons, is in the Textile Museum, Washington DC.32 There is no firm indication that the carpet was ever wider, but it could have been up to three columns in width. Reportedly acquired from the Convent of Santa Ursula in Guadalajara, northeast of Madrid, both sections were once in Venice with the famous antique dealer Adolf Loewi. This lower section passed through Benadava in Paris and thence to the Wher Collection before coming to Doha.

At both ends of the field we see an extra ivory-ground panel with a procession of ‘lions’, each in a different colour, but perhaps most interesting feature of the Spanish version of this pattern is that the central eight-pointed star is interlaced, creating the illusion that the wheel is rotating. Once part of the original design concept, this refinement is seen in very few surviving Anatolian versions, yet it appears in all known Spanish ones.

The ground of the square compartments surrounding each large octagon has a beautiful interlaced design, reminiscent of a woven textile, and the borders that divide the octagons and surround the field are typically Spanish and have not been found in Anatolian examples.

Among the best known of all historical Anatolian carpet patterns is the so-called ‘arabesque’ or ‘Lotto’ design, which first appears in a European painting in 1516 and continued in use in Anatolian weaving until the end of the 17th century.33 Almost all of the two hundred or so surviving Anatolian arabesque rugs have deep red grounds with the pattern in bright yellow outlined in black and details in blue and ivory, although a few have blue or brown grounds, and the pattern is very occasionally worked in blue or ivory.

Over thirty Spanish carpets with the Turkish arabesque field design are known to survive, four of which include coats-of-arms.

Spanish arabesque carpets appear to have yellow backgrounds, although it is likely they were originally red and the red dye has oxidized. The pattern is usually in blue and ivory. The most common border is a curled-leaf pattern.

HALI ISSUE 157 71

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Spanish lampas designs.36 The earliest of the carnation group is a fragmented carpet in Madrid, with a wide Kufic border, large interlaced knots, deep reds and strong colours. Other examples have softer tones (apart from the blue) and yellow grounds that were originally red. It has often been suggested that the oxidised red seen on many carpets made from the early 16th century onwards marks the time when Jews and Muslims left Spain; dyeing was traditionally a Jewish craft.

Some of the carnation carpets made from the early 16th century onwards include birds, and two have the elegant Renaissance border pattern seen on the Qatar arabesque carpet 3. Related to the carnation rugs are a further 23 examples with single palmettes in a lattice. The f lowers and lattice are clearly European in style, but the concept can be seen in earlier Turkish models.

During the 17th century Spanish carpet weavers continued to copy patterns from other regions. At least two carpets are known with medallion Ushak designs, and two with the so-called ‘Smyrna’ or f loral Ushak design. At least one example copies a Cairene Ottoman design, and three more have designs copied from small Esfahan rugs, made in central Iran in the 16th and early 17th centuries. One of these has a cartouche border, possibly derived from a ‘Damascus’ rug. Two early Spanish carpets survive that have a cloud pattern directly copied from a 14th century Mongol silk.37

3 The Qatar arabesque carpet. Spain, 16th century. 2.83 x 5.49m (9'3" x 18'0").

MIAQ, no.TE26.

4 The Unger palmettes in diamondshaped lattice silk carpet fragment, Spain, early 16th century. 0.58 x 0.76m (1'10" x 2'6").

MIAQ, no. TE12.

72 HALI ISSUE 157

The MIAQ has one Spanish arabesque carpet, with the design in brown on an ivory ground, surrounded by an elegant Renaissance border of large leaves 3.34 Originally from a European private collection, it was acquired at auction in London in 1999. One of the finest examples extant, it was probably made in the first half of the 16th century, The Anatolian arabesque pattern also inspired a new Spanish design of serrated leaves that form an oval lattice and concave diamonds. Seven examples are known. A further seven carpets are known with a textile pattern of diagonal rows of large carnations directly copied from Ottoman silk velvets made in Bursa.35 This pattern was developed further in Spain: four rugs include additional f lowers, in a marriage between Ottoman velvet and

CARPETS WITH SPANISH SILK DESIGNS More than 150 Spanish carpets have designs derived from Spanish woven silk textiles. The earliest of these have the strong red and Kufic borders with animals attributable to the 15th century.

Four have a field pattern of lobed oval medallions either in a lattice or in diagonal rows,38 and twelve have ascending palmettes within an interlaced lattice.39 The lattice types and f loral patterns vary slightly and are used in different combinations.

Another lattice field design, which must have been popular for some time, features compartments filled with a large ascending side-view f lowers or palmettes. In 33 examples an ogival lattice is composed of two parallel stems. Six of these have the strong colours dateable to the late 15th and early 16th century, but the majority are from the second and third quarters of the 16th century. One of these, with a two-plane lattice with palmettes, probably from the mid- 16th century, is one of only two known Spanish classical carpets with silk pile.40 The other known Spanish silk carpet, a corner section with part of the field and the major and minor borders, is in the MIAQ 4.41 It is one of seven examples known (the others are woven in wool), with a design of palmettes in a diamondshaped lattice. Most of them have strong reds and Kufic borders, and are thought to date from the late 15th or early 16th century.

The MIAQ fragment is extremely finely knotted and dates from the very beginning of the 16th century. The wide lattice is in yellow – possibly originally red but now oxidised – and the background is green. The palmettes are linked diagonally by stems that intersect the lattice; the primary border has a meandering stem with f lowers pointing alternately inward and outward on a light blue ground.

Ten Spanish carpets have lattice designs that are unique sur vivors, including two with rampant lions, a pattern directly copied from Spanish woven silk textiles from the 15th century, and three with different Spanish silk brocade designs.42 At least twenty-three unclassifiable fragments have other types of lattices, and are from the late 16th to the early 18th century; a few of the later examples are inscribed and some are dated.

‘WREATH’ CARPETS The Anatolian design of rows of large octagons 2 must have inspired the largest single surviving group of Spanish carpets, those with rows of wreaths. In three of the earliest examples, the individual wreaths are placed within square compartments,

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 73

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

5 The Paris wreaths in compartments carpet.

Spain, 16th century. Three complete compartments with end panels, reduced in size from a larger carpet.1.02 x 2.89m (3'4" x 9'6") MIAQ, no.TE106.

6 The Mikaeloff wreaths carpet fragment, Spain, early 16th century.

1.40 x 1.31m (4'7" x 4'4"). MIAQ 7 The Milan circular Mamluk carpet (detail), Cairo, Egypt, 16th century. MIAQ, no.TE07

74 HALI ISSUE 157

the corners of which have typical Anatolian patterns, while the wreaths are distinctively European in style.

One of these three carpets, with greatly worn pile and probably reduced in size, is in the MIAQ 5. It was acquired at auction in London in 2007, having previously been on the art market in both Paris and New York. The two others are in Berlin and Miami.43 On all other Spanish wreath carpets the columns and rows of wreaths have no containing compartments; in some of the oldest examples the secondary motif diagonally adjacent to the wreaths resembles the secondary motif on many Anatolian carpets. The MIAQ has one such fragment, with four wreaths and no borders 6. Once with Yves Mikaeloff in Paris, it was acquired at auction in London in 1997.

Another section of this carpet, also with four wreaths but with parts of the border attached, was on the New York market some twenty years ago.44 A small number of examples have different variations of the wreath pattern.

The few publications to date on Spanish carpets have tended to focus on specific collections. The most important and best of these is still Alfombras Antiguas Espanolas, the rare catalogue by Ferrandis Torres for the 1933 Madrid exhibition, which brought together examples from a number of sources. Substantial research has been undertaken in European inventories for records of Spanish carpets, and some work has been done to collate their depictions in Western paintings, but there has not, to date, been any attempt to compile a complete catalogue of all surviving Spanish carpets, or to analyse them,45 carry out dye tests, and in some instances carbon-14 analyses.

The time is ripe for a major exhibition of the greatest Mudejar carpets – perhaps the MIAQ will, in due course, accept the challenge?

EAST MEDITERRANEAN CARPETS: EGYPT & SYRIA The MIAQ Collection includes eight knotted-pile carpets made in the East Mediterranean region in the 16th century. Six are attributable to Cairo and two to Damascus. Four of the Cairene rugs and one of the Damascus rugs (only a section of border of the other survives) are in the ‘Mamluk style’ with designs of geometric motifs and small f loral elements in a predominantly red, green and blue palette. The other two carpets from Cairo are more colourful, in the more naturalistic Ottoman f loral style.

Knotted-pile carpets have probably been made in the Levant and Anatolia since the second millennium BC or before.46 Woolpile f loor coverings were made in Egypt before 2000 BC,47 although in these earliest surviving Egyptian carpets the pile is looped around the warps, rather than being individually tied and knotted. It is not known when the knotted-pile technique was first used in Egypt, but it may go back at to at least 500 BC. The oldest, almost complete, knotted-pile carpet currently known to have been found in Egypt has been carbon-14 dated to 580–920 AD, although the materials suggest that it may have been made in Anatolia.48 Many tiny fragments of knotted-pile carpets have also been found in the rubbish dumps of Fustat.

The oldest of these are from the Abbasid period (758–1258): some may have been made in Egypt, others could be from Mesopotamia, Anatolia and Iberia.49 There are Arabic references to 14th century carpets made in Cairo,50 but no actual examples survive that can be conclusively linked to this period.51 Carl Johann Lamm found two small fragments in Fustat that may represent carpet weaving from the mid-15th century.52

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS MAMLUK-STYLE CARPETS The Mamluk Sultanate (1250-1517) was centred on Egypt, but also embraced parts of south and central Anatolia, including the Malataya region, all of present-day Syria west of the Euphrates, the entire eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea, as well as parts of present-day Jordan, Libya and Tunisia. Its principal cities were Cairo and Damascus. The Mamluks are known for their beautiful glassware, extraordinary metalwork, intricate wood-carving and kaleidoscopic ‘silk-like’ carpets.

Carpets in the ‘Mamluk-style’ (I use this term because most sur viving examples were probably made after the Ottomans overthrew the Mamluk Sultanate in 1517), stand very much on their own among oriental rugs, with their unique blend of shimmering wine-red, green and light blue tones, their silky wool and, above all, their exquisite variety of accurately drawn ornaments, large and small, in intricate arrangements.

These carpets are now generally thought to have been made in Cairo, having first been thus attributed by some of the earliest carpet scholars.53 However, because their patterns do not stylistically sit comfortably with the other Mamluk court arts, for many years the traditional Cairo label was not accepted by all experts, and some more recent writings have put forward alternative, less convincing, places of origin.54 The survival of a small number of carpets bearing the blazon of the Mamluk Sultan Qait Bay strengthens the attribution of these examples (and many others) to Cairo,55 while the rediscovery in 1983 by Alberto Boralevi of a hitherto unknown Mamluk-style carpet in the Medici Pitti Palace in Florence helps to establish the argument in favour of Cairo as the centre of production,56 as an inventory record from 1587 calls the Medici carpet ‘Cairino’.57 In pristine condition, its virtual pair is in San Rocco in Venice.58 Recently published research by Marco Spallanzani informs us that “…in 1545 Iacopo Capponi went to Alexandria with instructions to buy various things for Duke Cosimo I de Medici, including an unspecified number of rugs to be made to order”, which were shipped to Livorno in 1547. Inventory records from the late 14th to the late 17th century report carpets coming from Cairo.59 These must represent only a fraction of the Mamluk-style carpets that arrived in Italy, for there is little doubt that the vast majority were imported via this route.

My archive contains images of 136 Mamluk-style carpets made in Egypt during the 15th and 16th centuries, divisible into groups by approximate age and by design detail.60 Arguably the oldest surviving example is the Salvadori fragment in the Victoria & Albert Museum, London.61 Four carpets from the same period bearing the blazon of Sultan Qait Bay (r.1468-1496) were almost certainly made in Cairo in the second half of the 15th century.62 These five, along with others in various collections that were probably originally from larger carpets with three central medallions, represent the so-called ‘first-period’ of Mamluk carpet weaving, prior to 1500.63 A second group of nearly thirty Mamluk-style carpets, rugs and fragments can attributed to the first quarter of the 16th century.

Another hundred or so were probably made during the second and third quarters of the 16th century. Thereafter the Cairene workshops that made the Mamluk-style carpets were engaged in making carpets in the new Ottoman style, using identical dyes and materials. At least eight carpets are known that represent a transitional group with elements of both styles.64 From the mid14th century a parallel development was probably occurring in the northern Mamluk capital of Damascus in Syria, where carpet design was being inf luenced by or inf luencing designs in Anatolia and Iran.

Assigning carpets to particular periods is fairly arbitrary and depends on a number of features. Pre-1500 Mamluk-style pieces tend to have longer pile, natural-coloured warps, a looser construction and more colours than those of later periods. Carpets from the first and second periods tend to have between five and seven colours, some have red-dyed warps, and they often have HALI ISSUE 157 75

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

8. The Arhan Mamluk carpet. Cairo, Egypt, 16th century. 2.51 x 3.08m (8'3" x 10'1").

MIAQ,no. A22

76 HALI ISSUE 157

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS bands of stylised Kufic script. Those from the third period generally have just three colours, yellow-dyed warps and simple cartouche borders. A general simplification of pattern seems to have occurred over time. Such differences probably represent the output of different Cairene workshops in at different times, rather than alternative places of origin.65 Other writers on the subject take a different view. Jenny Housego has proposed a Maghrebi (northwest African) origin for all Mamluk carpets.66 Jon Thompson has tentatively suggested that the ‘early’ examples were made in Cairo, as one was found there, but that the main corpus was made elsewhere, perhaps in Syria, close to the Mamluk Sultanate’s northern frontier with Turkey, while also suggesting that the Maghrebi possibility should be explored further for the main group.67 Carlo Suriano has also divided Mamluk carpets into two groups, one made in the Huaran district or Shawbak in Syria, and the other in Cairo.68 His argument refers to Charles Grant Ellis,69 who wrote that several of the earlier Mamluk carpets have distinctive technical differences from later ones, including multiple wefts, unusually long pile and abnormal colouring, although both groups share the technical features of S-spun wool and asymmetric knotting. Ellis attributes this small group to the Maghreb and the main group to Cairo. Suriano’s desire to return the bulk of Mamluk carpets to Syria may have been inspired by Thompson’s 1980 article, or by the many earlier and contemporaneous references to Syrian carpet making, or by the fact that S-spun wool was found in Iraq, but his discussion omits any reference to the evidence that the Medici Mamluk came from Cairo.

At least fifteen European paintings are known that depict identifiable Mamluk-style carpets from Cairo,70 the earliest being Paris Bordone’s Fisherman Presenting St Mark’s Ring to the Doge, painted about 1540. Thompson shows that Bordone’s carpet, with a medallion set against a plain field, is similar to the Bardini blazon carpet in Florence, which is attributed to the end of the 15th century.71 Bordone’s carpet may thus have been fifty or more years old when he painted it. However, the Mamluk carpets depicted in the famous Moretto frescos in Brescia belong to a later generation with simpler patterns, and may therefore have been less than twenty years old when they were painted in 1543. Mamluk-style carpets from Cairo continue to appear in European paintings through the 16th and early 17th centuries.

All carpets made in Cairo from the 15th to 17th centuries share a distinctive woven structure: the wool is mostly S-spun and Z-plied, the opposite of almost all other ‘oriental’ rugs of whatever age or place of origin. The knots are asymmetric, similar to the technique used in Syria, central and eastern Iran, India and China. In the earliest examples the warps tend to be undyed, with red-dyed wefts, although occasionally both warps and wefts are red. On the vast majority of examples in the third group, the warps and wefts are dyed yellow or yellow-green, a feature that continued in use for later 16th and early 17th century Ottoman-style rugs. The long-staple wool used for the warps and pile is very glossy, resembling silk. A unique example knotted in silk on a silk foundation survives in the Österreichisches Museum für angewandte Kunst in Vienna.72 Earlier Mamluk-style carpets tend to be knotted with five or seven colours (red, green, blue, yellow, ivory, purple and brown), while later ones use as few as three (red, green and blue). As on Indian and Iranian carpets, the red is created from the insect dye lac, and is often corroded, while the blue is dyed with indigo, which tends to preserve the wool. On a rug that has seen little wear, the blue areas are often higher than the red, giving an embossed effect. Lac appears to have been used less often on examples from the second half of the 16th century, which achieve a similar colour from the related insect dye cochineal, although the latter rarely has the depth of colour given by lac.

The unique colour spectrum and spectacular kaleidoscopic ornamentation of Mamluk carpets is drawn from some of the best of Islamic art and design. In 1924, Friedrich Sarre related

the general composition of the Habsburg silk Mamluk carpet in Vienna, a large central compartment surrounded by smaller, square ones, to the 15th-16th century mosaics on the f loor of the Mosque of Sultan Hassan in Cairo.73 The basic composition of the Mamluk carpets, based on a centralised motif surrounded by a symmetrical arrangement of rectangular and square compartments, is probably derived from pavements and mosaic f loors of the Roman period. Similar compositions can also be seen on Egyptian Coptic textiles from the 3rd to 9th centuries. The f loor is a ref lection of the heavens above, and it is unsurprising that similar compositions appear on later Islamic ceiling patterns. Many Mamluk carpets have a single central medallion, but there are more than thirty large format examples with either three or five medallions.74 Almost all Mamluk carpet patterns are designed to be viewed from all directions, perhaps because they were intended to mirror ceiling patterns. However, there are three Mamluk rugs with directional designs indicating that they were made to hang on a wall, in front of a cupboard, or as a doorway.75 The ornamentation of Mamluk carpets draws upon a wide range of artistic sources and has been of intense interest to scholars. Studying one of the Ballard Collection Mamluk rugs in St Louis in 1925, Rudolf Riefstahl compared a motif composed of a palm tree f lanked by two cypresses, commonly found on later Mamluk carpets, to Assyrian stone decoration from the 7th century BC.76 Some ornaments, such as the octagons, the interlace and various minor details, form part of an ‘international’ style seen on rugs from Spain to India. Other minor motifs are specific to Cairene carpets and can be traced from medieval western Islamic decoration back to Hellenistic art. Some, such as the ‘umbrella’ and ‘lancet’ leaves, have been explained as a conscious return to Egyptian ornament. The designs on the earliest Mamluk carpets are extremely complex and wellproportioned, whereas later the patterns are simplified.

Although the patterns of Mamluk carpets are mostly composed of octagons, eight-pointed stars and compartments, other designs were also used. Four surviving carpets have a two-level diamond lattice, each compartment containing a single f lower.77 Two of them have the traditional Mamluk border of a cartouche alternating with a lobed medallion, and two have a design of large tulips, which continued to be used on rugs with Ottoman field designs. They were probably made in the second or third quarters of the 16th century, after the transition from Mamluk to Ottoman styles had begun.

The MIAQ has four Mamluk-style carpets made in Cairo in the 16th century. They are all from the third period, and two are major works of art, retaining much of their original pile and colour. So many Mamluk carpets are extensively restored, so to find two with original pile is a great bonus.

The Arhan Mamluk carpet 8, reportedly with the same Turkish family for over seventy years, was acquired by the MIAQ in 1997.78 Probably made in the second quarter of the 16th century, it has just three colours, red, green and blue. The red (lac) has corroded, while the blue (indigo) and green pile is quite high in places, giving a sculpted effect. The carpet had been folded for many years: along the fold lines are some tiny holes, probably caused by moth and now skillfully restored.79 The drawing is remarkably good, and the serrated edge of the eight-pointed star medallion is also found on some second period carpets. An extra panel at each end of the field contains large circular medallions alternating with groups of three trees: a palm f lanked by cypresses.

A special feature, in the inner and outer minor borders, is the three balls and wavy lines of the Ottoman çintamani symbol.

Four circular carpets from Cairo are known. Three of them have Mamluk geometric designs: the Barbieri carpet in the Bruschettini Foundation, Genoa; the Olmutz carpet at Kremsier Castle in the Czech Republic; and the Milan carpet in the MIAQ.80 The fourth, a later example in the Corcoran Gallery of HALI ISSUE 157 77

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Art in Washington has an Ottoman field design.81 There is good evidence that round carpets were made for royal and imperial tents in Iran, India and China, and there is every reason to think that round Mamluk carpets were used the same way in Egypt. When they arrived in Europe, such carpets were used as table covers. The 1587 Medici archives in Florence mention a circular ‘cairino’ carpet,82 and two ‘round Mamluks’ appear in the 1596 Innsbruck inventory of Grand Duke Ferdinand II of Austria,83 who received one as a gift from the Medici court.84 The round carpet in the MIAQ 7, 9 was probably made early in the second quarter of the 16th century. Its beauty lies in its rich colours (red, blue, green and yellow) and its lustrous pile, having survived in pristine condition for almost five centuries.

9 The Milan circular Mamluk carpet, Cairo, Egypt, 16th century. 2.78 x 2.26m (9'1" x 7'1").

MIAQ, no.TE07

78 HALI ISSUE 157

The fact that all its original edges are still intact suggests that they were once bound with a tape or silk cloth.

The other two Mamluk-style carpets in the MIAQ collection, a rather worn rug 10 and a small fragment from a large carpet 11, are both study pieces, acquired at auction in London in 1996 and 1998 respectively.85 The rug, with a medallion and bands of cypresses and palm trees, was formerly in the Bernheimer Collection, Munich, while the fragment had appeared on the London market a number times since the early 1980s.

It is unlikely that the MIAQ will be able to acquire a first period Mamluk carpet, but a few second period examples remain in private hands, and an early example would certainly be a strong addition to the two outstanding carpets already in the collection.

10 The Bernheimer Mamluk rug with medallion and bands of cypress and palm trees. Cairo, Egypt, 16th century. 1.37 x 2.04m (4'6" x 6'8”).

MIAQ, no.CA04.

11 Mamluk carpet fragment. Cairo, Egypt, 16th century.

Field section, 0.49 x 1.91m (1'7" x 6'3").

MIAQ, no.CA06.

CAIRENE OTTOMAN CARPETS Almost a hundred rugs and carpets with f loral designs survive from Cairene workshops. Scholars generally agree that the first Ottoman design rugs were made there. Ernst Kühnel tells us that “the connection with Mamluk rugs [is] undeniable, because of the similarity of the material... More important and even conclusive is the frequent mention of ‘Cairene’ rugs expressly called in French, German, Italian, and Spanish inventories of the XVIth-XVIIth centuries. Their beauty is repeatedly emphasised by comparison with the famous Persian carpets, and in some instances they are classified as ‘Turkish rugs from Cairo’.”86 Despite this, some authors, including Kühnel, have conjectured that certain Ottoman court rugs, especially the finest niche rugs and related examples with similar structure may have been made somewhere closer to the court, in either Bursa or Istanbul.

This suggestion was occasioned by a single document which refers to “...eleven rug masters of Cairo, mentioned by name, who had been ordered to the court of Constantinople in 1585, together with their load of wool…”.87 Citing Kurt Erdmann, Kühnel proposed that these rug masters “most certainly had to run a manufactory working for the Turkish Sultan”, and that this factory was most probably located in Bursa.88 This attempt to establish that Bursa was a rug producing centre in the latter part of the 16th century is based on two further

documents, one of 1474, the second in 1525 (which mentions six rug-makers and nine workmen).89 In fact, the confusion dates back to the early 20th century when F.R. Martin described the Imperial Austrian Ottoman f loral field niche rug, without evidence, as being from unspecified “Ottoman Imperial manufactories in Asia Minor”.90 So when, in 1938, Erdmann published his 1585 reference to the Egyptian weavers arriving in Turkey, the attribution was adopted – unquestioned – by almost every subsequent carpet scholar.91 In 1981, after a number of Ottoman carpets had been physically analysed and the ‘evidence’ reviewed, the proposed Turkish attribution was shown to be unsound. Examination of the twelve Ottoman carpets in the Victoria & Albert Museum, London, as well as a large number of other examples in European public and private collections led Robert Pinner and me to conclude that: “The question, which of the known Ottoman f loral carpets were produced in Turkey seemed at one time to be answered by the identification of two major groups: one, of relatively coarselywoven rugs with both the foundation and the pile in wool, and with its structure and colour closely related to Mamluk carpets, and a second group of more finely woven carpets, with silk warps and wefts, and with a pile consisting not only of wool but also white, and sometimes blue, cotton. The attribution of the latter group to ‘Istanbul’ or ‘Bursa’ appeared to be supported by the

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

12 The Hackwood Park Cairene Ottoman medallion carpet. Cairo, Egypt, 3rd quarter 16th century. 2.81 x 5.17m (9'3" x 17'0"). MIAQ, no.CA05.

13 The Bernheimer Ottoman medallion rug. Cairo, Egypt, 16th century. 1.32 x 1.91m (4'4" x 6'3").

MIAQ, no.CA63 14 The Muse East Mediterranean cartouche-border carpet (detail), Damascus, Syria, 15th or 16th century.

MIAQ, no.TE14

80 HALI ISSUE 157

fact that both the silk and the cotton were Z-spun in a nonEgyptian manner.92 The apparent contradiction, presented by the fact that the wool was mainly S-spun, i.e., as in Mamluk and ‘Cairene’ Ottoman carpets, was explained by adherents of this theory, by the suggestion that the pile wool was imported [into Turkey] from Egypt.”93 Alberto Boralevi’s discovery of the two great Cairene carpets of the Medici in the warehouses of the Pitti Palace is of inestimable importance in this discussion. Of greater significance here even than the Medici Mamluk is the Ottoman carpet, also in excellent condition.94 Boralevi writes of it: “As stated in the inventory, the Ottoman carpet was brought as a gift to the Grand Duke Fernando II in the year 1623 by the Admiral Da Verrazzano, possibly a descendant of the great navigator”,95 and concludes: “The evidence of the Archives, which defines the Ottoman as Cairene, supports the theory… according to which all these carpets were manufactured in the same Egyptian workshops during the Ottoman Empire.”

The 1623 inventory date of the Medici carpet provides the only reliable benchmark for dating Cairene Ottoman rugs. From its present-day appearance we may assume that it was new at the time of acquisition, and we may further assume that the workshops producing rugs of this type probably continued to do so throughout the 17th century. However, stylistically the Medici carpet marks the decline of the artistic tradition, and it is likely that several of the finer Ottoman niche rugs pre-date it. There is also some limited assistance to be drawn from tests of Mamluk and Ottoman carpet dyes performed by Mark Whiting in the

1980s, which establish that the red dye in Mamluk rugs was mostly lac,96 while of the two Ottoman carpets he tested, the red of one was lac, the other cochineal, which “…allows the possibility of using dye-analysis to separate the Ottoman carpets into an earlier and a later group, with, of course, the usual reservations about the length of the period during which both dyes were used, and the uncertainty of the mid-point.”97 It is possible that some Cairene Ottoman design rugs pre-date a few Mamluk design rugs. The Medici carpet, considered on stylistic grounds to be the latest known example of its type, from between 1557 and 1571, may suggest that Ottoman designs were being made in Cairo from at least the beginning of the third quarter of the 16th century, if not a little before. We may also assume that the earliest examples in the new Ottoman style were still quite similar to Mamluk rugs.98 The very finely knotted silk-foundation niche rugs with highly refined designs may well have begun to be made by the latter part of the 16th century.

There are two Cairene Ottoman carpets in the MIAQ collection.

The finer of the two is a large carpet acquired at auction from the English country house Hackwood Park in 1998 11. It is very finely woven, with superb drawing and composition,99 but while the wefts and warps are almost all original, there is hardly an original knot left on the carpet. The clarity of drawing and fine articulation of pattern strongly suggests that it pre-dates the Medici Ottoman carpet and can be ascribed to the beginning of the third quarter of the 16th century. Certainly the restoration followed the original pattern faithfully, so the Hackwood carpet remains a very good document of an Ottoman carpet pattern.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS The second Cairene Ottoman rug in the MIAQ 12, acquired at auction in London in 2004, was formerly in the Bernheimer family collection, having been acquired by Otto Bernheimer in 1919.100 It belongs to a group of small-format rugs, several of which have exactly the same colours and dimensions as some of the small Mamluk-style rugs, and represent a continuum from the same workshops. While the pattern is reasonably clear, the drawing is not quite as refined as on the more finely knotted examples. The round green medallion and green quartered medallions in the corners are typical. At each end of the field are small circular half-medallions. The f loral pattern in the background appears as a section from an endless repeat that disappears beneath the borders and medallions. The medallions also create the illusion of an infinite repeat design, a section of which is framed by the borders. Other workshops in Cairo produced small rugs, some very finely knotted with much crisper renderings of Ottoman f loral designs, in particular a group of prayer rugs, several of which are on a silk foundation.

Both Cairene Ottoman carpets in Doha should be viewed primarily as study pieces. However, there is every possibility that this area of the collection can be raised to the level of the Mamluk examples in the foreseeable future.

MAMLUK-STYLE CARPETS FROM SYRIA Carpets must have been made in present-day Syria, the Levant and the upper reaches of the fertile valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers since antiquity. The majority of the people inhabiting this region were semi-nomadic pastoralists, and wool-pile carpets must have been part of their daily furnishings.

Three thousand years ago the great cities of ancient Mesopotamia had stone ‘carpets’, which perhaps ref lect the patterns on pile carpets that no longer survive. Five centuries later, the land between the Tigris and Euphrates and much of present-day Syria was ruled by the Persians. Their great empire was then conquered by the Greeks and later by the Romans, whose villas had mosaic f loors that were probably covered with carpets in winter.

Two thousand years ago, Syria was an important section of the ancient Silk Road that linked China to Greece and Rome.

Knotted-pile carpets with Greek mosaic designs have been found in Central Asia, and Chinese woven silks have been discovered in Syria, demonstrating that textiles travelled across the entire breadth of Asia, enabling new designs and ornaments from distant lands to be copied along the way. It is against this background that we should consider the origin of carpet designs in this region, some of which may derive from or ref lect the patterns of f loor tiles and woven silks.

In the 7th century Syria, Iran and much of Central Asia was conquered by the Arabs, whose spiritual inf luence and knowledge of geometry continues to inf luence design to this day. The Mongol invasion in the 13th century carried with it Chinese and Central Asian patterns that are occasionally seen in Syrian carpet design.

Our interest here lies in Syrian carpet design from the 15th to 17th centuries, and in particular the early part of that period, under Egyptian rule. In 1250, the Mamluks defeated the Ayyubid Empire in Egypt, and in 1260 advanced along the East Mediterranean coast to defeat the Mongol armies at Ayn Jalut, extending the Mamluk Sultanate to include Syria and southern Anatolia.

They ruled this region for some 250 years until they were defeated by the Ottoman Turks in 1516. It was the Mamluk style that most powerfully inf luenced carpet making in Syria, and their inf luence, in particular in colouration, continued through the 17th century.

So-called ‘Damascus’ carpets have a distinctive handle, weaving technique and colouration. The wool is generally Z-spun, while carpets made in Cairo tend to use S-spun wool. The pile is generally quite hairy, perhaps made of goat’s wool, and unlike Cairene carpets rarely has much sheen. The knot is for the most part asymmetric, in common with rugs from Cairo, central and eastern Iran, India and China. By contrast, Anatolian carpets tend to be symmetrically-knotted (this technique spreads beyond the HALI ISSUE 157 81

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

15 The Wher East Mediterranean compartment rug, Damascus, 16th century. 1.30 x 1.75m (4'3" x 5'9"). MIAQ, no.CA44

82 HALI ISSUE 157

borders of present-day Turkey into the Caucasus and northwest Persia). The warps are generally ivory wool and are often quite hairy, again perhaps from goats. The 2-ply wefts, of similar wool, are generally dyed red. There are two weft shoots between each row of knots, the second pulled very tight so that the upper warp almost almost covers the one beneath, producing a heavily depressed foundation weave and a firm handle.

Very few Damascus carpets survive in good condition – most are damaged and many exist simply as fragments. Although they appear to be quite thick and sturdy, the method of construction makes them quite fragile. Fragmentation may be due to the fact that with their stiff handle they break when folded. In most examples as much as 10cm, sometimes more, is missing from the ends. This may be due to the fact that the original narrow kilim at each end was not adequately secured, so that the rows of knots simply fell away.

Their predominant red, blue and green palette is very much in the taste of Mamluk carpets from Egypt, although on Syrian carpets the red dyes are almost always madder, in common with Anatolian rugs. Thus in their colours and knotting Syrian carpets resemble those of Egyptian, in their spinning and dyeing they resemble Anatolian carpets, and in their patterns, they show inf luences from Anatolian, Egyptian and Iranian carpets.

It is not known whether the sixty ‘Damascene’ carpets received in 1520 by Cardinal Wolsey in exchange for allowing wine to be traded in England were actually from Damascus, nor do we know what they looked like.101 It is certain, however, that by the 16th

century, Syrian or ‘Damascus’ rugs had arrived in Europe.102 At least one is depicted in a European tapestry from that time.103 John Mills has shown that the Damascus ‘compartment’ design is first seen in an Italian painting before 1581, and lists seven further occurrences in Italian, English and Dutch paintings up to the third quarter of the 17th century.104 Onno Ydema records 23 ‘compartment’ carpets in 17th century Netherlandish paintings.105 It may perhaps be assumed that not all such rugs were new when they were depicted.

A number of Syrian carpet patterns are represented by just one or two surviving examples, and there are two larger design groups. The so-called ‘para-Mamluk’ carpets and the ‘chessboard’ or ‘compartment’ rugs.

The ‘para-Mamluk’ carpets are the oldest surviving examples attributable to the northern part of the Mamluk Empire, dating from the 14th to the early 16th century. The term was coined by Charles Grant Ellis and groups together at least fourteen carpets and fragments with a number of common features.106 Most have similar compositions, colouration and minor ornaments, but there is some technical variation: some are asymmetrically knotted, some symmetric, and others a combination).

The oldest is the so-called ‘Domes and Squinches’ rug in the Vakıf lar Museum, Istanbul, which has been labelled as early as the 13th century, although it is more likely to have been made in the 14th.107 It was found in the Great Mosque in DivriÌi along with another para-Mamluk with a simpler design, possibly from the 15th century. Both were probably made in east or southeast Anatolia, then part of the Mamluk Empire. Twelve other paraMamluk rugs survive: three complete, some small fragments, some larger carpets and a unique prayer rug. These can be dated to the late 15th and early 16th century, as examples with related patterns are depicted in at least a dozen European paintings.108 It has been suggested that these rugs, together with others from Spain, western Anatolia, Syria, Iran and India, form part of an ‘international’ carpet style that continued through the 14th to the 16th century.109 There is continuing debate concerning the source of the paraMamluks: some writers have attributed them to eastern Anatolia, others to Tabriz in northwest Iran. However, the limited available evidence suggests that at least some were made in presentday Syria or southeastern Anatolia, as they form a continuum with the vast majority of later rugs attributed to that area. Jon Thompson has suggested that the ‘para-Mamluks’, and the later ‘compartment’ carpets, might belong to the Turkmen tradition.110 However, while some of their border designs do relate to those depicted in Iranian paintings of the Turkmen period, neither the field patterns nor the palette fit comfortably into Turkmen art, appearing closer to the Mamluk style, whether from Egypt or southeastern Anatolia.111 The most common design on Damascus carpets is the abovementioned ‘compartment’ pattern, many elements of which can be seen in ‘para-Mamluk’ rugs. The field is covered with a grid of compartments formed on a red ground by four corner triangles, leaving an octagon within centred on an interlaced star with eight radial pairs of ‘cypresses’, an ornament shared with Mamluk rugs from Cairo. Secondary banded compartments are formed by vertical and horizontal cypress pairs, with a quartered diamond formed by the four adjacent triangles at the centre. In the full version of this complex interlocking design, two other substrate patterns emerge: the diagonal pairs of cypresses form a diagonal lattice, while the ends of the cypresses are drawn so as to create an impression of rows of circles within the compartments.112 These ‘compartment’ rugs tend to come in three sizes: large carpets, smaller and small rugs. It is mostly the small rugs that have survived, and one was acquired by the MIAQ in 1998 15.

The field depicts almost six complete hexagonal compartments.

These abut vertically, but conjoining the hexagons diagonally are large blue diamonds divided through the centre, so that in part they can be seen as quartered triangles, and the compart-

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS ment or tile is in fact a large square where the triangles form the corner pieces. In the centre of each compartment is the ‘Damascus’ star and radiating from this are cypress-like forms. All these patterns can be found on the earlier ‘para-Mamluk’ carpets.

A number of border patterns are known for these rugs, of which the one seen in the MIAQ rug is the most common. Four leaves extend from large lobed medallions, with small cartouches between. In Mamluk carpets the cartouche is generally considerably larger than the lobed medallion. The rug has much of its original pile and remarkably fresh colours. As with so many Damascus rugs, parts of the end borders have been lost and have been replaced.

Undoubtedly the most beautiful cartouche border known on a Damascus carpet can be seen on a spectacular fragment in the MIAQ 14, 16. Sadly, nothing of the field survives. Much of the patterning is on two levels, with elegantly drawn leaves and tiny interlaces. A complex design is used for the minor borders, demonstrating that it came from a very refined workshop. The corners are well resolved and a small part of the cartouche from the upper border remains. This tantalising fragment is from the very best Damascus carpet known.

A deeper understanding of Syrian carpet design can be gained from the patterns of the twelve known examples that have neither ‘para-Mamluk’ nor ‘compartment’ designs, at least two of which might have been made in southeast Anatolia.113 The largest (some 7.70m long) and most spectacular are two almost identical medallion carpets in the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Art (TIEM) in Istanbul. These have two onion-shaped medallions with pendants in dark blue with rumi split-leaves that form a diamond-shaped inner medallion. Secondary round medallions along the sides of the field are only partially visible, as they are cut off by the border. The medallion, reminiscent of Ushak carpets, more likely draws its inspiration from Iranian patterns and Ottoman book covers. The field is surrounded by a cartouche and medallion border, like so many Mamluk carpets, but with a very different pattern. Both carpets, although almost complete, are composed of many reassembled fragments.

A beautiful early Damascus carpet in the Museum of Islamic Art in Berlin, in outstanding condition, has a field entirely covered with cloudbands, a pattern that originated in China and reached Syria via Iran. In Istanbul there is a very small singleniche fragment from a multiple-niche saf prayer carpet, another part of which is in the Wher Collection. Two fragments in the Keir Collection, acquired from Salvadori in Florence, add to the picture of Damascus carpet design. One has small palmettes covering the field in the Iranian manner. The other has a field of lobed medallions altering with ‘Damascus’-style stars; in the centre is a large eight-pointed star medallion. The field is surrounded by a border of cartouches with cloudbands and eightlobed medallions.

A fragment from a large carpet with a field of scrolling vines and large palmettes in the Iranian manner and a border somewhat resembling the wavy lines and balls of the çintamani design was given in 1991 to the Metropolitan Museum of Art by the Marshall & Marilyn R. Wolf Foundation. Four other Damascus carpets were found in the Great Mosque at DirviÌi, along with the two ‘para-Mamluks’. Two of these are probably from Syria and the other two are attributed to southeast Anatolia when it was still part of the Mamluk Empire. One of the Syrian rugs has diagonal rows of diamond-shaped medallions separated by a diamond-shaped lattice composed of small leaves, with a small tree-like form in each medallion. The other has rows of palmettes alternating with cloudbands. One of the southeast Anatolian rugs has an eight-pointed star medallion with four wheel-like octagons. The other has a large leaf pattern that forms a diagonal lattice with small rosettes in each compartment.

If we compare the few rugs from Egypt and the East Mediterranean region currently in collections in Berlin, London, New York and in particular The Textile Museum in Washington DC,

16 The Muse East Mediterranean cartouche-border carpet (border section), Damascus, Syria, 15th or 16th century.

0.15 x 0.46m (6" x 1'6"). MIAQ, no.TE14

the MIAQ has some way to go to build a truly exciting and interesting collection in this area. An earlier Mamluk carpet, a Cairene Ottoman rug woven on silk, a ‘para-Mamluk’, a large ‘compartment’ carpet or indeed a ‘Damascus’ with an unusual design would all be significant additions. Some examples still survive in private collections, although great items rarely come onto the market, and to find rugs with original pile, pristine colours and excellent drawing is an even greater challenge. However, it is to be hoped that this small but very good group of rugs from this region will continue to be expanded to create something really special in the Muslim world.

HALI ISSUE 157 83

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS NOTES 1 George Hewitt Myers, founder of the

3rd century

is not certain that the Popes’ carpets are

a different design, similar to borders of

Textile Museum, Washington DC, was

aeology, Urumqi, no.M15:1. Excavated at

Spanish – it is possible that they were

armorial carpets.

one of several collectors and connois-

Yingpan, tomb no.15. Published: König

made in France in the Spanish style. For

19 After the Popes’ fresco in Avignon,

seurs in the first half of the 20th century

1999, p.87; Li 2002, pp.7, 11 (detail and

more than 300 years from the early 13th

dating from the first half of the 14th

who greatly admired Spanish and East

reconstruction, with technical description);

century in Paris, two separate guilds of

century, a number of other carpets with

Mediterranean carpets. He acquired 22

Li 2006, pp.254–5, figs.198, 199 (with

carpet-makers existed side by side, the

small lattice field designs are depicted in

Spanish carpets from the classical period

diagram of structure showing single warp

Tapiciers sarrazinois and the Tapiciers

paintings from the early 16th century

as well as 31 East Mediterranean carpets

offset knotting).

nostres. As the name implies, the Sara-

(see note 10 above, and Lisbon 2007).

(16 Mamluk-style Egyptian rugs, ten Otto-

8 Serjeant 1972, p.175 (referring to

cenic carpet weavers were engaged in

20 Seven have identifiable coats-of-arms;

man-style Egyptian rugs and five ‘Damas-

Al-Himyari 1938, p.112, trans., p.138):

manufacturing carpets based upon East-

three of these may be complete, and

cus’ rugs), published in two separate mono-

“They used to make fine and valuable

ern originals, while the other guild pro-

the others are shortened in length. Two

graphs (Textile Museum 1953, 1957).

carpets (busut) at Murcia. The people of

duced carpets in a local style. [Pinner]

shortened carpets have unidentified

2 Those with important large collections

Murcia have unequalled skill in manufac-

1978, taken from Boileau 1897.

blazons. Five shortened carpets, mostly

have included: Count Johannes von Wel-

turing and decorating these carpets.”

14 King 1986, pp.131–7.

still with their borders, are without

czeck, George Hewitt Meyers, Don José

9 (1) Sages and Virtues carpet. Mid-12th

15 Madrid 1933.

blazons. Fragments survive from at

de Weissberger, Charles Deering, Wendy

century. 64 x 182cm, section. Halberstadt

16 It is known from paintings and doc-

least thirteen other such carpets.

and Emery Reves. Other collectors have

Cathedral Treasury. Published: Wilckens

uments that both Spanish and oriental

21 Beattie 1986.

had a number of examples, including:

1992, pp.103, 105, figs.10, 12.

carpets were used in European churches

22 May 1945; Beattie 1986.

Archer Milton Huntington, John D.

(2) Border fragment with palmettes. 12th

and synagogues from the Middle Ages

23 One example depicts a wild boar, not

McIlhenny, Joseph Lees Williams,

century. 20 x 400cm. Halberstadt Cath-

onwards; some were made specifically

an appropriate subject for an Islamic rug.

George Blumenthal, the Marquis de

edral Treasury. Published: Wilckens 1992,

for altars or as ark curtains, probably

It may well be that the Admiral carpets

Valverde, James F. Ballard, John Emery,

pp.103, 105, fig.13.

ordered by wealthy patrons. The Von

were woven by Muslim weavers to

Baron & Baroness Thyssen-Bornemisza,

(3) Wedding of Mercury and Philologia

Bode synagogue rug. 14th century. 95 x

patterns supplied by their clients.

the Marquesa de Bermejillo del Rey,

carpet. (a–e) Five fragments (originally

385cm. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

24 The so-called ‘Kufic’ border also res-

Sidney A. Charlat, Marino & Clara

590 x 740cm). 1186–1203. Quedlinburg

no.I.27, acquired 1906. Formerly: Repor-

embles the elem on Salor Turkmen door

Dall’Oglio and Frederick Pratt.

Cathedral Treasury. Published: Kurth 1926,

tedly from a church in the Tyrol district,

rugs or ensi. These unusual patterns were

3 To name but a few: Vitall Benguiat and

I, pp.53–67, fig.26,II, pls.12–21, 22b;

1880s; art market, Munich, 1884; Wilhelm

surely part of a tradition that drew upon

AD.

Xinjiang Institute of Arch-

Mayorcas in New York; Böhler, Munich;

Nickel 1976; Wilckens 1992. (f) One frag-

Bode. Published: Bode, 1892, p.49 (cited);

both local textile designs and imported

Adolfo Loewi, Venice; Stefano Bardini,

ment. Whereabouts unknown. Formerly:

Bode 1901, p.115, fig.79 (drawing); Sarre

carpets and textiles for inspiration.

Florence; Michel Campana and Elio Cittone

Welczek Collection, Austria (to 1945).

1907; Thomson 1910, pl.IIc; Kendrick and

25 Pinner 1986 lists some forty docu-

in Milan; Lionel Harris, Jekyll’s and C. John

Published: Kurth 1926, II, pl.21a; Wilckens

Tattersall 1922, vol.II, pl.77A (drawing);

ments between 1527–1622 that refer to

in London; and Sammy Tarica, Yves Mikael-

1992, p.100 (cited).

Neugebauer and Orendi 1923, p.8, fig.2

Turkish carpets in Spanish inventories,

off, Masson, Benadava and Catan in Paris.

10 Two paintings depicting early Spanish

(drawing); Faraday 1927(1), p.9, fig.6

some with ‘Kufic’ borders with interlace.

Interestingly, most of the examples were

carpets that have been cut and reduced

(detail); Faraday 1929, 1990, p.35, fig.5

26 Two Spanish carpets with the inter-

acquired by dealers of Spanish Sephardic

in size: (1) Presentation in the Temple.

(detail); Sarre, 1930 (detail); Erdmann

laced medallion ‘small-pattern’ Holbein

origins and few by Armenian dealers.

Francisco Henriques, ca. 1508–1511. Oil

1970, p.143, fig.181 (detail); Sherrill 1974,

design: (1) The Boston interlaced medal-

4 These illustrations of classical Spanish

on wood, 88 x 15cm. Museu de Alpiarça,

p.532, fig.1 (detail); Curatola 1981, no.141;

lion carpet. 106 x 462cm. Museum of

knotted-pile carpets have been taken

Alpiarça. From the altarpiece of the main

London 1983, pp.33, 50–51, no.3; Wear-

Fine Arts, Boston, no.39.614. Published:

from museum inventories and archives,

chapel of the church in the Convento de

den 1985, p.205, fig.a; Sánchez Ferrer

Erdmann 1960, fig.175 (detail); Schlosser

the carpet literature, sale catalogues and

São Francisco, Évora. Published: Lisbon

1986, pp.290–1, pl.V (detail, with struc-

1963, p.174, fig.100 (detail); Erdmann

examples that have come to the market.

2007, p.59. Carpet with octagons and

ture analysis); Day 1989, p.316, fig.313;

1970, p.210, fig.271; Washington DC 1972,

I am sure that these records are by no

lozenge pattern. (2) Mass of Saint Greg-

Berlin 1995, pp.23, 28, no.8; Sherrill

no.28 (cited); Sherrill 1974, p.541, pl.III;

means complete and it is possible that as

ory. Francisco Henriques, c. 1508–1511.

1996, p.31, pl.20; Felton 1997, pl.1;

Mackie 1979, p.92, fig.20; Denny 1978,

many as 150 further items are not recor-

Oil on wood, 88 x 121.5cm. Museu

Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection 1998,

p.157, fig.1; Denny 1982, p.332, fig.5

ded, but it is unlikely that any important

Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon. From the

p.239, fig.1.

(detail); London 1983, pp.36, 53, no.7;

early example would not have been

altarpiece of the main chapel of the church

17 Pinner 1986, p.295.

Ellis 1986, p.172, fig.10; Day 1989, p.320,

published and come to my attention. The

in the Convento de São Francisco, Évora.

18 The field and border patterns on one

fig.316; HALI 52, 1990, p.131 (detail);

major museums with Spanish carpets

Published: Lisbon 2007, p.60; Mills 2007,

carpet were clealry changed as the rug

Gantzhorn 1991, p.233, fig.344; Sherrill

are in Madrid, Berlin, London, New York,

p.134, fig.2. Carpet with design of stars

was being made. The Myers palmettes in

1996, p.36, pl.26; HALI 99, 1998, p.84

Miami, Dallas and Washington, with indi-

in octagons and lozenges, ‘Kufic’ border.

interlaced lattice carpet. Mid- to second

(detail). Exhibited: Washington DC 1972;

vidual notable examples in Paris, St Louis,

11 May Beattie (1986, p.273), in her study

half 15th century. 184 x 219cm, incomp-

London 1983; Boston, Museum

Cleveland and Detroit. Over the past

of the ‘Admiral’ carpets, pointed out that

lete in length. Textile Museum, Washing-

of Fine Arts, ‘Ten Great Carpets’, 1977;

thirty years, 29 examples have passed

it is impossible to estimate the number

ton DC, no.R44.4.2 (R84.10). Formerly:

Boston, Museum of Fine Arts, ‘Oriental

through my studio in London.

of surviving examples: “Without

George Hewitt Myers Collection, acquired

Carpets and Kilims’, 23 July 1990 to early

5 The latter coming from Arraiolos, where

considering border fragments, two or

1927. Published: American Art Associa-

January 1991; Boston, Museum of Fine

workshops were certainly started in the

more pieces may be from a single rug,

tion, New York, 30 April 1927, lot 1040,

Arts, ‘Ambassadors from the East: Oriental

16th century; many of the oldest exam-

and conversely, the skilful joining and

p.335; Textile Museum 1953, p.11, pls.IX

Carpets in the Museum of Fine Arts, Bos-

ples copy Safavid Iranian carpets, others

patching of carpets carried out in Spanish

–XI (with structure analysis); Weeks and

ton’, 29 September 1998 to 24 January

copy Anatolian rugs and Arraiolos carpets.

convents points to the possibility of

Treganowan 1969, p.13, top (detail); Wash-

1999. (2) The Loewi interlaced medallion

6 Examples can be found in: Museum of

several parts of different rugs being

ington DC 1972, no.35 (cited); Mackie

carpet. 155 x 290cm. Textile Museum,

Islamic Art, Cairo; Textile Museum, Wash-

combined into what, in a photograph,

1977, p.25, fig.13; Sánchez Ferrer 1986,

Washington DC, no.R44.3.1 (R84.6),

ington DC; Metropolitan Museum of Art,

appears to be a complete carpet.”

pp.394–5, pl.LVII (with structure analysis);

acquired 1926. Formerly: Adolfo Loewi

New York; National Museum, Stockholm;

12 I have yet to find a document to

Sherrill 1996, p 41, pl.36; Isaacson 1998,

Collection, Venice; George Hewitt Myers

Röhss Museum, Gothenburg; Keir Collec-

confirm this. Eleanor of Castile was

p.79, fig.2; Bier 2003(1), p.42, fig.3; Wash-

Collection. Published: Textile Museum

tion, Ham; Museum of Islamic Art, Doha

married in October 1254 at the age of ten

ington DC 2003, pp.28, 284, fig.26 (with

1953, p.27, pls XXIV–XXV (with structure

(MIAQ), Benaki Museum, Athens.

to King Edward I of England, then fifteen,

structure analysis). Exhibited: Washington

analysis); Mackie 1979, p.93, fig.22;

7 E.g., Crouching lion rug. Incomplete,

at Las Huelgas .

DC 1972; Washington DC 2003, ‘Carpets

Mackie and Thompson 1980, p.21, fig.8

possibly originally 178 x 312cm. 1st to

13 By Matteo di Giovanetti da Viterbo. It

of Andalusia’. Blue ground; lower part has

(detail); Bier 2003(1), p.42, fig.2 (detail);

84 HALI ISSUE 157

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Washington DC 2003, pp.22, 283 (with

Crivelli (Venice – about 1430/5 – about

(1) The Madrid carnation carpet. (a) 128 x

structure analysis); Bier 2004, p.13.

1494), 1486. Egg tempera and oil on

199cm. Museo del Instituto Valencia de

2002, pp.100–101, pl.27. Exhibited: Madrid

27 The Welczeck endless knot design

canvas transferred from wood, 207 x

Don Juan, Madrid. Published: Sánchez

1933. (2) The Welczeck carnation carpet.

ail); Museo Nacional de Artes Decorativas

carpet. Late 15th or early 16th century.

146.7cm. National Gallery, London,

Ferrer 1986, pp.356–7, pl.XXXVIII (with

153 x 28cm. Whereabouts unknown.

Formerly: Count Welczeck Collection.

no.NG739.

structure analysis). (b) 50 x 65cm, section.

Formerly: Count de Welczeck Collection.

(a) 75 x 250cm, section of field and border.

31 Pentecost. Anonymous [possibly

Whereabouts unknown. Formerly: Livinio

Published: Madrid 1933, p.109, no.18,

Wher Collection. Formerly: The Textile

Garcia Fernandes, Portuguese Royal

Stuyck Collection, Madrid. Published:

pl.XIII (detail); Sánchez Ferrer 1986,

Gallery, London. Published: Gantzhorn

painter, died 1565], ca. 1530. Oil on wood,

Madrid 1933, p.107, no.9, pl.VIII (detail).

pp.366–7, pl.XLIII (detail, with structure

1991, p.222, fig.334; Enderlein 1993,

132.5 x 165cm. Ermida de Nossa Senhora

Exhibited: Madrid 1933. (2) The Valverde

analysis). Exhibited: Madrid 1933. (3) The

p.91, fig.12; HALI 108, 2000, p.75 (detail);

dos Remédios, Lisbon. Published: Lisbon

carnation carpet. 52 x 62cm, section.

Victoria & Albert Museum carnation carpet.

Milan 1999, p.185, no.166 (with structure

2007, p.62, no 6. The carpet has at least

Museo del Instituto Valencia de Don Juan,

150 x 292cm. Victoria and Albert Museum,

analysis). Exhibited: Milan 1999. (b) 62 x

two columns and four rows; at each end

Madrid. Formerly: Marquis de Valverde

London, no.T.604-1893. Published: Martin

250cm, section of field and border. Chris

is an extra panel with bird-like creatures

Collection. Published: Faraday 1927(1),

1908, p.137, fig.350 (detail). (4) The

Alexander Collection, Berkeley. Formerly:

separated by ‘Kufic’-style uprights.

p.12, fig.12 (detail); Faraday 1929/1990,

Welczeck medallion and carnation carpet.

The Textile Gallery, London; Wher Collect-

32 The Convent of Santa Ursula large

p.37, fig.11 (detail); Sánchez Ferrer 1986,

105 x 182cm. Whereabouts unknown.

ion. Published: Lefevre, London, 18 June

octagon carpet. (a) Lower part, 103 x

pp 360–1, pl.XL (detail, with structure

Formerly: Count de Welczeck Collection.

1982, lot 24; HALI 4/3, 1982, p.52; Gantz-

250cm, three octagons. MIAQ, no.CA24.

analysis). (3) The Ballard carnation carpet.

Published: Madrid 1933, p.109, no.17,

horn 1991, p.222, fig.334; Alexander Col-

Formerly: Reportedly from the Convent of

140 x 275cm. Metropolitan Museum of

pl.XII. Exhibited: Madrid 1933.

lection 1993, pp.114–15; Bennett 1994,

Santa Ursula, Guadalajara; Adolfo Loewi

Art, New York, no.22.100.124. Formerly:

37 Two Spanish carpets with a cloud

p.89, fig.7); Milan 1999, p.185, no.166

Collection, Venice, no.7.419b; Benedava,

James F. Ballard Collection. Published:

design from Chinese Mongol silks:

(cited). (c) 186 x 297cm, section of field

Paris; Wher Collection. Published: Ferr-

New York 1923, no.127; Metropolitan

(1) The Dumbarton Oaks clouds carpet.

and border. Museum für angewandte

andis Torres 1942, fig.15; Gamal 1963;

Museum of Art 1973, pp.259, 263, no.155,

152 x 373cm. Textile Museum, Washing-

Kunst, Frankfurt, no.12975/3889. Pub-

Milan, Palazzo Reale, 1974; Ellis 1986,

fig.224 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

ton DC, no.1976.10.3. Formerly: Dumbar-

lished: Museum für angewandte Kunst,

p.168, fig.6. (b) Upper part, 97 x 390cm,

New York 1923. (4) The Krauth carnation

ton Oaks Collection. Published: Washing-

Frankfurt, Neuerwerbungen, 1956–1974,

four octagons. Textile Museum, Washing-

carpet. 94 x 132cm, section. Museum of

ton DC 1972, no.37 (cited); Mackie 1977,

pl.53; Hubel 1971, p.295, fig.154 (detail,

ton DC, no.R44.2.2 (R84.12), acquired

Islamic Art, Berlin, no.KGM 81.382. For-

p.28, 31, fig.17 (with structure analysis);

with structure analysis); Milan 1999, p.185,

1931. Formerly: Reportedly from the

merly: Consul Krauth, Krefeld, in 1888;

HALI 1/2, 1978, p.166 (detail); Mackie

no.166 (cited). (d) Incomplete, bottom half,

Convent of Santa Ursula, Guadalajara;

Kunstgewerbemuseum, Berlin. Published:

1979, p.94, fig.29; New York 1992,

reduced in width? Whereabouts unknown.

Adolfo Loewi Collection, Venice; George

Museum of Islamic Art 1988, pp.122 and

pp.344–5, no.102; Sherrill 1996, p.34, pl.23

Published: Torres 1942, fig.20; Gamal 1963;

Hewitt Myers Collection, Washington DC.

283, no.144 (with structure analysis). (5)

(detail); Bier 1996(1), p.69, fig.32; Bier

Alexander Collection 1993, pp.114–19

Published: Textile Museum 1953, p.17,

The Toledo carnation carpet. Private col-

2003(1), p.43, fig.6 (detail); Washington

(“Although current dating has tended to

pls. XVI–XVII (with structure analysis);

lection, New York. Formerly: Said to be

DC 2003, pp.27, 283, fig.25 (with structure

ascribe this carpet a 15th century date, I

Bunt 1966, fig.46; Weeks and Tregan-

from a convent chapel, Toledo; Lenygon &

analysis). Exhibited: Washington DC 1972;

am certain in my own mind that this

owan 1969, p.19, right (detail); Wash-

Co., London; Vojtech Blau, New York; The

Washington DC 2003. (2) The Madrid

dating is not correct…This carpet was

ington DC 1972, no.30 (cited); Sherrill

Textile Gallery, London. (a) 270 x 288cm,

clouds carpet. Section. Museo Nacional

probably woven in the 10th or 11th

1974, p.535, fig.5; Mackie 1977, p 26,

bottom half. Published: Thomson 1910,

de Artes Decorativas, Madrid, no.1.742.

century and certainly no later than the

fig.15; Mackie 1979, p.91, fig.12; Collins

p.109 (detail); Sánchez Ferrer 1986,

Published: Museo Nacional de Artes

12th” [sic].) John Mills has mentioned in

1988, p.42; Gantzhorn 1991, p.229,

pp.364–5, pl.XLII (detail, with structure ana-

Decorativas 2002, p.96, pl.24.

conversation the relationship of the field

fig.340; Sherrill 1996, p 37, pl.28; Wash-

lysis); Lefevre, London, 2 April 1976, lot 7

Two Turkish rugs with a cloud pattern

design of this carpet to certain ceiling

ington DC 2003, pp.25, 283, fig 23 (with

(with detail on front cover); Sotheby’s,

from Chinese Mongol silks: (1) The Ala-

designs in southern Spain.

structure analysis); Bier 2004, pp.12–13.

New York, 7 April 1992, lot 74 (with struc-

eddin Mongol silk pattern rug. Central

28 Two Spanish carpets with rows of

Exhibited: Washington DC 1972; Wash-

ture analysis). (b) 298 x 286cm, top half.

Anatolia, 14th century. 121 x 240cm.

small octagons: (1) The Lionel Harris

ington DC, 2003, ‘Carpets of Andalusia’.

Published: Lefevre, London, 2 April 1976,

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts,

thirty octagons carpet. 214 x 460cm.

33 Although the Venetian painter Lorenzo

lot 7 (with detail on front cover); Sotheby’s,

Istanbul, no.688. Formerly: Alaeddin

Victoria & Albert Museum, London,

Lotto depicted carpets of this type only

New York, 13 April 1995, lot 139 (with

Mosque, Konya. Published: Aslanapa

no.T.104-1912. Formerly: Reportedly from

twice in approximately 250 known works

structure analysis). (6) The Emery

1961, pl.V (detail); Erdmann 1970, p.96,

a convent in Spain; Lionel Harris

– both fairly late in his career, in 1542 and

carnation carpet. 287 x 620cm. Cincinnati

fig.26; Aslanapa 1971, pl.XIV; Mackie

& Co., London. Published: Victoria and

1547 – his name has become irrevocably

Museum of Art, no.1966.638. Formerly:

1977, fig.18; Yetkin 1981, pl.6 (detail);

Albert Museum 1915, no.345, pl.XXXIX

linked with them: Sant’ Antonio Elemo-

John Emery Collection. Published: Adams

[Anon] 1988, pattern code 0108; Aslanapa

(detail); Réal [1925], pl.XXI (detail); Kend-

sinario Giving Alms, 1542, church of SS.

1971, p.273 (detail); Cincinnati Art Museum

1988, p.21, pl.7; Day 1989, p.45, top left;

rick and Tattersall 1922, vol.II, pl.77B

Giovanni e Paolo, Venice (Mills 1981,

Bulletin, vol.9, nos.1–2, p.55, June 1971;

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts

(detail); Ferrandis Torres 1942, fig.19;

p.283, no.11); Family Portrait Group, 1547,

The Art Quarterly, vol.XXIX, nos 3–4,

1993, p.206, pl.115 (detail); Ölçer et al.

Gamal 1963; Sherrill 1974, p.540, fig.9;

National Gallery, London (Mills 1981,

p.298, 1966; Lefevre, London, 2 April

1996, p.7, pl.4. (2) The Bardini Mongol silk

Mackie 1979, p.93, fig.25; Pagnano 1983,

pp.280–1, no.12). The earliest verifiable

1976, lot 7 (cited); Masterpieces from the

pattern rug. Ushak, late 15th century.

pl 235; Wearden 1985, p.207, fig.b; Sán-

depiction in a European painting of an

Cincinnati Art Museum, 1984, p.42.

Possibly originally 75 x 350cm. (a) 57.5 x

chez Ferrer 1986, pp.354–5, pl.XXXVII

Anatolian arabesque rug is in fact in a

Almost the pair to the Toledo carpet. (7)

156cm, section. Museum of Islamic Art,

(with structure analysis); Gantzhorn 1991,

painting by the Venetian artist Sebastiano

The Spier carnation carpet. 56 x 48cm,

Berlin, no.1885. 985. Formerly: Wilhelm

p.232, fig.343; Bennett 2004, p.268.

del Piombo (ca. 1486, Venice – 1547,

section. Victoria & Albert Museum,

Bode; Kunstgewerbemuseum, Berlin.

(2) The Welczeck small octagons carpet.

Rome), dated 1516, in the National Gal-

London, no.T.335-1920, gift of J. Spier.

Published: Enderlein 1979, fig.1; Florence

38 x 70cm, fragment. Whereabouts

lery, Washington DC: Cardinal Bandinello

Published: Sánchez Ferrer 1986, pp.362–3,

1999, p.74 (cited); Beselin 2005, p.66,

unknown. Formely: Count Welczeck

Sauli, His Secretary and Two Geograph-

pl.XLI (with structure analysis); Day 1989,

pl.50 (with structure analysis). (b) 61 x

Collection. Published: Madrid 1933,

ers (Mills 1981, p.281, no.1).

p.324, fig.320.

165cm, section. Bardini Museum, Florence.

p.108, no.13, pl.X (detail). Exhibited:

34 The Qatar arabesque carpet. 16th

36 Some Spanish carpets with the ‘Eur-

Published: Florence 1999, pp.74–5, no.22.

Madrid 1933.

century. 283 x 549cm. MIAQ, no.TE26.

opean’ carnation pattern: (1) The Marquesa

Two Mongol cloud pattern silks, 13th–14th

29 E.g., Stories from the Life of St Ursula.

Formerly: Private collection, Switzerland.

de Bermejillo del Rey carnation carpet.

century: (1) Metropolitan Museum of Art,

Vittore Carpaccio (Venice 1472 – Capodis-

Published: Christie’s, London, 14 October

435 x 220cm. Museo Nacional de Artes

New York, no.46. 156.20. Published: Mac-

tria 1526), (1490–96), tempera on canvas.

1999, lot 100; HALI 106, 1999, p.132;

Decorativas, Madrid, no.19.222. Formerly:

kie 1977, p.1532, fig.19. Mackie refers to

Gallerie dell’Accademia, Venice.

HALI 108, 2000, p.131 (detail).

Marquesa de Bermejillo del Rey. Published:

others published by Agnes Geijer (1963,

30 Annunciation with Saint Emidius. Carlo

35 Some Spanish carnation carpets:

Madrid 1933, p.114, no.47, pl.XXXVIII (det-

p.83, figs.1, 2). (2) State Hermitage Mus-

HALI ISSUE 157 85

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS eum, St Petersburg, no.LT-449. Discov-

ton DC, no.R44.2.1 (R84.8). Formerly:

Lyons, no.27.658, acquired 1905. Form-

442cm, incomplete in length. Victoria &

ered by V.G. Bock at Al-Azam, Egypt. Pub-

Vital Benguiat Collection, George Hewitt

erly: Kalebdjian, Paris. Published: Bennett

Albert Museum, London, no.T.39-1896.

lished: Edinburgh 2006, pp.96–7, no.96.

Myers Collection, Washington DC, 1920.

1987, p.32, fig.XIX (with structure analy-

Formerly: J. Sasson & Co., London.

38 Some Spanish carpets with rows of

Published: Amercian Art Association 1920,

sis); Day 1989, p.325, fig.322; Faraday

Published: Martin 1908, p.135, fig.345

lobed medallions: (1) The Costikyan-Pope

no.317; Textile Museum 1953, p.19,

1990, p.39, pl.V. (8) The Myers-Bernheimer

(detail); Thomson 1910, p.IIA (detail);

lobed-medallion carpet. 81 x 72cm, section

pls.XVIII–XIX (with structure analysis);

interlaced lattice carpet. (a) 184 x 219cm,

Victoria and Albert Museum 1915/1920,

of central field and borders. Textile Mus-

Weeks and Treganowan 1969, p.17;

incomplete in length. Textile Museum,

no.336, pl.XXXVIII (detail); Réal [1925],

eum, Washington DC, no.R84.3, acquired

Washington DC 1972, no.31; Mackie

Washington DC, no.R44.4.2 (R84.10).

pl.IX (detail); Kendrick and Tattersall 1922,

1915. Formerly: Kent Costikyan and A.U.

1979, p.90, fig.9; London 1983, pp.36,

Formerly: George Hewitt Myers Collect-

vol.I, p.70 (cited); Faraday 1927(2), p.89,

Pope, New York; George Hewitt Myers

52, no.5; Wearden 1985, p.208, fig.a;

ion, acquired 1927. Published: American

fig.5 (detail); Faraday 1929, p.39, fig.16

Collection, Washington DC. Published:

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th edition;

Art Association, New York, 30 April 1927,

(detail); Victoria and Albert Museum 1931,

Textile Museum 1953, p.23, pl.XXI (with

Ellis 1985, p.63, fig.4; Sánchez Ferrer

lot 1040, p.335; Textile Museum 1953,

no.336, pl.XLIV (detail); Sánchez Ferrer

structure analysis); Weeks and Treganowan

1986, pp.388–9, pl.LIV (with structure

p.11, pls.IX–XI (with structure analysis);

1986, pp.418–9, pl.LXIX (detail, with

1969, p.14, top (detail); Sánchez Ferrer

analysis); Collins 1988, p.44; Faraday

Weeks and Treganowan 1969, p.13, top

structure analysis); Faraday 1990, p.41,

1986, pp.380–1, pl.L (with structure ana-

1990, p 42, pl.VI (detail); Sherrill 1996,

(detail); Washington DC 1972, no.35 (cited);

fig.16 (detail); Woolley 1995, p.72, fig.7

lysis); Bier 1992, p.62, fig.12; Washington

pp.28, 40, pl.34; Bier 1996(1), p.69, fig.31;

Mackie 1977, p.25, fig.13; Sánchez Ferrer

(detail); Sherrill 1996, p.45, pl.41 (detail).

DC 2003, pp.21, 283, fig.19 (with structure

Bier 1996(2); HALI 92, 1997, p.102, fig.11;

1986, pp.394–5, pl.LVII (with structure

43 Three early Spanish carpets with

analysis). Exhibited: Washington DC 2003,

Sherrill 1999, p.216, figs.1, 2 (detail);

analysis); Sherrill 1996, p.41, pl.36; Isaac-

wreaths: (1) The Paris wreaths in com-

‘Carpets of Andalusia’. (2) The Loewi lobed-

Washington DC 2003, pp.29, 284, fig.27

son 1998, p.79, fig.2; Bier 2003(1), p.42,

partments carpet. (a) 102 x 289cm, three

medallion carpet. 86 x 190cm, section. Text-

(with structure analysis). Exhibited: Wash-

fig.3; Washington DC 2003, pp.28, 284,

complete compartments with end panels,

ile Museum, Washington DC, no.R44.2.3

ington DC 1972; London 1983; Washing-

fig.26 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

reduced in size from a larger carpet. MIAQ,

(R84.14), acquired 1931. Formerly: Adolfo

ton DC, 2003, ‘Carpets of Andalusia’.

Washington DC 1972; Washington DC,

no.TE106. Formerly: Paris art market; New

Loewi Collection, Venice; George Hewitt

(3) The Weissberger interlaced lattice

2003, ‘Carpets of Andalusia’. Blue ground.

York art market. Published: Christie’s, Lon-

Myers Collection, Washington DC. Pub-

carpet. 125 x 215cm. Museo Nacional

Lower part has a different design, similar

don, 16 April 2007, lot 46; Ghereh, 42,

lished: Textile Museum 1953, p.21, pl.XX

de Artes Decorativas, Madrid, no.3.407.

to borders of armorial carpets. (b) 104 x

2007, p.79. (b) Approx. 100 x 300cm, three

(with structure analysis); Mackie 1979,

Formerly: Don José A. de Weissberger

108cm, section. Wher Collection. Form-

wreaths. Whereabouts unknown. Form-

p.90, fig.11; Bier 1992, p.63, fig.13; Bier

Collection, Madrid, no.3. Published: Mad-

erly: Bernheimer Collection, Munich,

erly: Paris art market. (2) The Böhler

1996(1), p.69, fig.30; Bier 2003(1), p 42,

rid 1933, p.108, no.14, pl.XI; Campana

acquired 1951; The Textile Gallery, London.

wreaths in compartments carpet. 212

fig.1; Washington DC 2003, pp.20, 283,

1969, p.30, fig.12 (detail); Sánchez Ferrer

Published: Bernheimer 1959, pl.121;

x 100cm, section with two complete

fig.18 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

1986, pp.386–7, pl.LIII (with structure

Christie’s, London, 14 February 1996, lot

wreaths. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

Washington DC, 2003, ‘Carpets of Anda-

analysis); Museo Nacional de Artes

75 (with structure analysis); HALI 86,

no.KGM 94.413. Formerly: Böhler, Munich;

lusia’. (3) The Madrid lobed-medallion

Decorativas 1996, pp.36–7, no.1 (with

1996, p.133; Milan 1999, p.192, no.165.

Kunstgewerbemuseum, Berlin. Published:

carpet. (a) 28 x 70cm, section of field

structure analysis); Museo Nacional

Exhibited: Milan 1999. (9) The Perez inter-

Museum of Islamic Art 1988, pp.121,

and border. Instituto de Valencia de

de Artes Decorativas 2002, pp.82–3.

laced lattice carpet. Whereabouts

280, no.140 (with structure anlaysis);

Don Juan, Madrid. Published: Gamal

Exhibited: Madrid 1933. (4) The Charlat

unknown. Formerly: Perez, Amsterdam.

Taylor 1990, p.105, fig.11. (3) The Deering

1963; Sánchez Ferrer 1986, pp.384–5,

interlaced lattice carpet. 239 x 521cm.

Published: Faraday 1927(2), p.89, fig.4;

wreaths in compartments carpet. 198 x

pl.LII (detail, with structure analysis).

Metroplitan Museum of Art, New York,

Bunt 1966, fig 47. (10) The Welczeck

457cm, ten complete and two partial

(b) 87 x 126cm, incomplete. Whereabouts

Cloisters Collection, no.61.49. Formerly:

interlaced lattice carpet 1. 157 x 90cm,

wreaths. Villa Vizcaya, Dade County Art

unknown. Formerly: Count Welczeck

Sidney A. Charlat Collection. Published:

section of field and border. Whereabouts

Museum, Miami, no.DC2014/ DR33. For-

Collection. Published: Madrid 1933, p.107,

Faraday 1927(2), p.88, fig 3 (detail); Fara-

unknown. Formerly: Count Welczeck

merly: James Deering Collection, Miami,

no.11, pl.IX. Exhibited: Madrid 1933.

day 1929, p.38, fig.13 (detail); Metropoli-

Collection. Published: Madrid 1933,

bought at auction in New York, 7 January

A Spanish carpet with offset rows of

tan Museum of Art 1958, fig.13; Dimand

pp.108–9, no.16, pl.VII. Exhibited: Madrid

1914. Published: Taylor 1990, p.104, fig.8.

lobed medallions: The Madrid offset

1964, fig.13; Weeks and Treganowan 1969,

1933. (11) The McMullan interlaced lattice

44 The Mikaeloff wreaths carpet. 16th

lobed medallion carpet. (a) 22.5 x 80cm,

p.13, bottom (detail); Metropolitan Mus-

carpet. Section. Metropolitan Museum of

century. (a) Central section, 140 x 131cm,

section of field and border. Instituto de

eum of Art 1973, pp.160–1, 262–3, no.153,

Art, New York, no.57.150.90. Formerly:

four complete wreaths. MIAQ. Formerly:

Valencia de Don Juan, Madrid. Published:

fig.222 (with structure analysis); Sherrill

Joseph V. McMullan Collection. Published:

Galerie Yves Mikaeloff, Paris. Published:

Sánchez Ferrer 1986, pp.382–3, pl.LI

1974, p.539, pl.II (detail); Pagnano 1983,

Metropolitan Museum of Art 1973, p.258

Christie’s, London, 16 October 1997, lot

(detail, with structure analysis). (b) 30 x

pl.233; Sánchez Ferrer 1986, pp.392–3,

(cited); Bennett 1987, p.33 (cited). (12) The

101. (b) Central section with borders, 173

60cm, section of border and field. Museo

pl.LVI (with structure analysis); Faraday

Welczeck interlaced lattice carpet 2. 115 x

x 208cm, four wreaths. Whereabouts

Arquelógico Nacional, Madrid. Published:

1990, p.40, fig.13 (detail). (5) The Pratt

218cm. Whereabouts unknown. Formerly:

unknown. Published: Sotheby’s, New York,

Madrid 1933, p.108, no.12, pl.IX. Exhib-

interlaced lattice carpet. 150 x 241cm.

Count Welczeck Collection. Published:

5 December 1987, lot 55 (with structure

ited: Madrid 1933. (c) Section of field and

Brooklyn Museum, New York, no.43.24.6.

Madrid 1933, p.108, no.15 (cited). Exhib-

analysis); HALI 38, 1988, p.92; Christie’s,

border. Whereabouts unknown. Published:

Formerly: Mr & Mrs Frederick Pratt. Pub-

ited: Madrid 1933.

London, 10 April 2008, lot 94. Formerly:

Faraday 1929, p.43, fig.25, top; Faraday

lished: Bennett 1987, p.34, left; HALI 92,

40 The Reves palmettes in ogival lattice

New England art dealer, 1987; private

1990, p.49, fig.25, 20 x 25cm, 19 x 15cm,

1997, p.98, fig.1. (6) The Victoria & Albert

silk carpet. 197 x 118cm. Wendy & Emery

collection, Texas.

20 x 9cm. Private collection, Los Angeles.

Museum interlaced lattice carpet. 162 x

Reves Collection, Dallas Museum of Art,

45 Louisa Bellinger analysed the Textile

Formerly: Alcala Subastas, Madrid; The

228cm, reduced in length. Victoria & Albert

no.1985.R.87. Published: Philadelphia

Museum collection in 1953. Structure

Textile Gallery, London.

Museum, London, no.T.131-1905. Pub-

Museum of Art 1988, p.256 (cited). The

analysis can now be much more detailed.

39 Some Spanish carpets with palmettes

lished: Réal, [1925], pl.VII (detail); Kendrick

Dallas museum has ten Spanish carpets

46 Wall paintings are said to show that

in an interlaced lattice: (1) The Charleston

and Tattersall 1922, vol.II, pl.79; Victoria

acquired by the Reves from Tarica in Paris.

weaving with coloured wools to make

interlaced lattice carpet. 75 x 142cm,

and Albert Museum 1924, p.25, pl.XIX

41 The Unger palmettes in diamond-

covers and tapestries may well have

fragmentary, incomplete in length.

(with structure analysis); Thomson 1925,

shaped lattice silk carpet. 58 x 76cm,

been practised in one of the oldest urban

Wher Collection. Formerly: Charleston

p.232; Faraday 1929, p.38, fig.15; Schlos-

fragment. MIAQ, no.TE12. Formerly:

settlements at Çatal Hüyük in Anatolia,

Museum, Charleston; The Textile Gallery,

ser 1963, p.175, fig.101; Sánchez Ferrer

Unger Collection, Mexico; The Textile

almost 9,000 years ago (Mellaart 1967;

London. Published: Sotheby’s, New

1986, pp.390–1, pl.LV (with structure ana-

Gallery, London; Wher Collection.

Maréchal 1985; Mellaart et al. 1989).

York, 24 September 1991, lot 1 (with

lysis); Faraday 1990, p.40, fig.15. (7) The

Published: Sotheby’s, London, 10

47 Looped pile fragments discovered at

structure analysis); HALI 60, 1991, p.154.

Kalebdjian interlaced lattice carpet. 152 x

December 1992, lot 4.

Deir el-Bahri. See Petzel 1987.

(2) The Benguiat interlaced lattice carpet.

254cm, reconstituted from pieces of the

42 The Sasson confronting lions brocade

48 The Fustat lion rug. 165 x 91cm. Fine

165 x 234cm. Textile Museum, Washing-

original. Musée Historique des Tissus,

design carpet. 15th to 16th century. 226 x

Arts Museums of San Francisco. Formerly:

86 HALI ISSUE 157

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS reportedly excavated at Fustat (old Cairo)

Venice 1993, pp.326–7, no.191; HALI 108,

been followed and adapted by other

Tribute to Charles Grant Ellis’, 1997; Wash-

in the 1920s; private collection, Paris;

2000, p.4 and front cover (detail); Museum

authors. Following Erdmann and Bösch, I

ington DC, Textile Museum, ‘Mamluk Rugs

Soustiel, Paris; The Textile Gallery and

für Angewandte Kunst 2001, p.42 (cited);

have arranged the Mamluk carpets in my

from Egypt’, March to September 2003.

Bashir Mohammed, London. Published:

Florence 2002, p.142, no.115; HALI 146,

archive as follows. A, Multiple medallions:

(b-r) 17 fragments, approximately two-

HALI 32, 1986, p.6; Norris 1987, p.54;

2006, p.51 (detail); Prato 2006, p.51;

A1 Five medallions (1); A2 Three medal-

thirds of the original carpet, 456 x 945cm.

Wilkinson 1987, p.63. C-14 dated bet-

Okumura 2007, pp.254–7, no.74 (with det-

lions (24). B, Single central medallion: B1

Bardini Museum, Florence, nos.526–542.

ween the second half of the 7th and

ails and structure analysis); Spallanzani

Bands with two sections (1); B2 Bands

Published: Florence 1996, pp.9, 11, 19

2007, p.55 (cited); Spallanzani [i.p.], fig.2.

with three or more sections (21); B3 Bands

and front cover (fragment); Suriano 1996;

49 Examples survive in several major

Exhibited: Venice 1993; Florence 2002;

with three or more sections and palms/

Suriano 1998, p.74, fig.3 (all 17 fragments

museum collections. The largest single

Prato 2006. One of the largest antique

cypresses (18); B4 Undivided bands with

with TM fragment, reconstruction), p.76,

the end of the 9th century

AD.

group is in Sweden (Lamm 1937; Stock-

oriental carpets known; entered the Medici

palms/cypresses (7); B5 Undivided bands

fig.5 (one fragment, no.12/526, 228 x

holm 1985). The Benaki Museum in Athens

archives between 1561 and 1571.

other (21). C, Single central medallion (no

219cm, with TM fragment), p.78, fig.13

has thirty fragments, many with knotted-

57 Boralevi 1986: “Un tappeto Cairino

bands): C1 Corner motifs (10); C2 No cor-

(two fragments, nos.3/528, 215 x 269cm,

pile but some in looped-pile technique

lungo b.19 et largo b.7 mandato o Firenze

ner motifs (4). D, Plain field: D1 Plain field

and 2/527, 228 x 267cm), p.79, fig.14

(Theologou 2008). Other fragments: Mus-

a quella Guardaroba a di 29 di Dicembre

with blazon (3); D2 Related examples with-

(detail); Florence 1999, front cover (detail),

eum of Islamic Art, Cairo; Textile Museum,

1587.” The carpet is identified not only by

out blazon (2). E, Directional designs (3).

pp.24–7, no.1 (with structure analysis); Boralevi 1999, p.79 (details of one frag-

Washington DC; Metropolitan Museum of

its dimensions but also by the inventory

F, Circular (3). G, Unclassifiable fragments

Art, New York; Keir Collection, Ham; Lloyd

number painted on the back. Spallanzani

(8). H, Unsorted, no images on file (17).

ment); Grube, 2000, p.82, figs.1, 2 (detail);

Cotsen Collection, Los Angeles.

2007, p.55: The Medici carpet was taken

I, Mamluk-Ottoman transitional (7). J, Frag-

Museum für Angewandte Kunst 2001,

50 Thompson (2006, p.123), citing Robert

from Florence to Rome in the 16th

ments from 15th century carpets (2).

p.38 (cited); Florence, 2002, p.139, no.112;

Irwin and Donald Little’s research on Arabic

century and then returned to Florence. It

61 The Salvadori three-medallion Mamluk

Istanbul 2003, pp.86–7, no.10 (with struc-

references during this period (Irwin 1986;

“is not mentioned in the inventories of

carpet. 153 x 218cm, about half the original

ture analysis); Suriano 2004, p.103, fig.15

Little 1984; Little 1986; Little 1998).

1553–4 or of 1560, but can be identified

width of an end section. Victoria & Albert

(one fragment, no.3/358, 215 x 269cm);

51 Thompson (2006, pp.126–7, fig.108

in some documents dated 1571–2”. This

Museum, London, no.T.150-1908. Form-

Thompson 2006, pp.128, 130 (details);

and note 107) illustrates a small border

does not prove that it was made in Cairo,

erly: Giuseppe Salvadori, Florence (acq-

Spallanzani 2007, p.231, pl.94. Exhibited:

fragment from Fustat with a Kufic-style

but it shows that in the latter part of the

uired in Italy). Published: Ellis 1967, p.8,

Florence 1996; Florence 1999; Florence

border and asymmetrical knotting and

16th century it was thought to have come

fig.12 (with structure analysis); Thompson

2002; Istanbul 2003. (2) The Barbieri Mam-

attributes it to the Mamluk period, prob-

from there. Thompson (2006, p.165, note

1980, p.14, fig.2; King 1981, p.36 (cited);

luk carpet with blazons. 341 x 415cm,

ably 14th century Egypt. The attribution

150) expands on this and rightly questions

Pinner and Franses 1981, p.38, fig.1

probably reduced in length. Metropolitan

appears to be based on its structure,

the supposition it was without doubt made

(detail), p.42, fig.1 (with structure

Museum of Art, New York, no.1970.135.

even though Thompson expresses doubts

in Cairo: two other carpets listed in the

analysis); London 1983, p.59, no.17;

Formerly: Piero Barbieri Collection, Genoa;

about certain aspects of the analysis by

inventory are almost certainly mislabelled,

Housego 1986, p.232, fig.19 (with struc-

Joseph Pulitzer Collection, 1970. Published:

Hoskins (2002) on which he relies. From

one as ‘Cairene’, the other as ‘Turkish’.

ture analysis); Gantzhorn 1991, pp.203–4,

Mayer 1933, pl.LXII, pp.29ff., nos.1, 4, 9,

the illustration the warps look like Z2S

Both would appear to be Iranian. Perhaps

figs.311–13; Suriano 2004, p.103, fig.14.

14; Ellis 1967, p.6, no.9, fig.11 (with struc-

wool, not S-spun linen as recorded. It is

one was described as Cairene because it

Exhibited: London 1983.

ture analysis); Housego 1986, p.236 (cited,

hard to see the spin of the pile yarn, and

reached Italy via Alexandria, and the other

62 Three Mamluk carpets with blazons:

with structure analysis); Bösch 1991, p.380, no.90; Suriano 1998, p.75, figs.4

the spin of the wefts is not discernable in

had passed through Istanbul (many

(1) The Bardini Mamluk carpet with

the illustration. The carpet should be re-

carpets described as ‘Iranian’ passed

blazons. (a) 209–23 x 221–6cm, part of

and 16 (detail); Suriano 2004, p.96, fig.4;

examined before attempting to make a

through Istanbul at that time).

field and border from left hand side of a

Thompson 2006, p.127 (cited); Okumura

serious attribution as to its origin.

58 The San Rocco Mamluk carpet with

very large carpet. Textile Museum, Wash-

2007, pp.214–7, no.59 (with details and

52 Two mid-15th century fragments

three medallions. 375 x 970cm. Arcicon-

ington DC, no.1965.49.1. Formerly: Stefano

structure analysis). (3) The Bruschettini

found at Fustat: (1) 22 x 17.5cm. National

fraternita di San Rocco, Venice. Published:

Bardini, Florence; Heidi Vollmöller, Switz-

Mamluk carpet with blazons. Three frag-

Museum, Stockholm, no.231/1939. Exca-

Curatola 1986, p.124 (detail); Bösch 1991,

erland, 1965. Published: Ellis 1967, p.2,

ments, 130 x 190cm, 195 x 358cm, 252 x

vated in Fustat, Old Cairo. Published:

p.354, no 21 (cited); Okumura 2007,

fig.1, p.5, and front cover and fig.10 (detail,

358cm. Bruschettini Foundation, Genoa,

Lamm 1937, pp.110–11, no.19; Stockholm

pp.236–7, no.66; Paris 2006, p.178, no.81;

with structure analysis; Ellis suggests the

no.T9. Formerly: Garry Muse, Tucson, and

1985, p 49, no.19 (with structure

Venice 2007, p.190, no.64; Denny 2007,

carpet was once about 450 x 1100cm);

The Textile Gallery, London. Published:

analysis); Suriano 1998, p.81, fig.22;

pp.178, 323, cat.81. Probably purchased

Camman 1972, p.48 (cited); Washington

Suriano 1998, p.75 and note 9 (cited).

Suriano 2004, p.104, fig.16. (2) 18.5 x

after 1541.

DC 1980, pp.84–5, no.6 (with structure

Some related Mamluk carpets without

21.5cm. National Museum, Stockholm,

59 Pinner 1986, pp.293–4.

analysis); Washington DC 1981, p.228

blazons:( 1) The Kelekian six-colour

no.232/1939. Excavated in Fustat, Old

60 I have examined 92 of the 136 Mamluk-

(cited); Pinner and Franses 1981, p.42

Mamluk carpet with large star medallion.

Cairo. Published: Lamm 1937, pp.110–11,

style carpets for which I have images

(cited); Ellis 1981, p.67, fig.3; London

36 x 160cm, section of field and small

no.18; Ellis 1967, p.15, fig.22; Stockholm

(another 17 are recorded in the literature

1983, p.60, no.18; Ellis 1985, p.62, fig.1;

piece of border. Textile Museum, Washing-

1985, p.48, no.18 (with structure analy-

but not illustrated). I have sorted them in

Housego 1986, p.232, fig.17 (with struct-

ton DC, no.R16.2.9 (R7.18), acquired 1952.

sis); Suriano 2004, p.104, fig.16.

the first instance by period and then by

ure analysis); Boralevi 1986, p.209 (cited);

Formerly: Kelekian Collection; K. Beshir.

53 Sarre (1921) and Erdmann (1930, 1931)

pattern schemes. They comprise: two

Curatola 1989, p.253; Bösch 1991, pp.378

Published: Erdmann 1940, p.67 (cited);

attributed them with confidence to Egypt.

Fustat fragments (excluding the symmet-

–9, no.88; Isaacson 1991, p.44; Gantzhorn

Textile Museum 1957, p.29, and pl.XVI

54 E.g. Housego 1986; Suriano 2004.

rically knotted example in Alexandria pro-

1991, p.369, fig.504; Bösch 1996, p.92,

(with structure analysis); Housego 1986,

55 See note 62 below.

posed by W.G. Thomson); nine ‘First

fig.10; Suriano 1996, no.13; Suriano 1998,

p.239 (cited, with structure analysis); Bösch

56 The Medici Mamluk carpet with three

period’, probably before 1500; 28 ‘Second

pp.74, 76, figs.3, 5; Museum für Ange-

1991, p.377, no.84 (cited, with structure

medallions. 409 x 1088cm. Argenti Mus-

period’, probably first quarter of the 16th

wandte Kunst 2001, p 38 (cited); Farnham

analysis); Bier 1991, p.123, fig.2; Bier

eum, Pitti Palace, Florence, no.5279. For-

century; 98 ‘Third period’, probably second

2001, p.84, fig.23; HALI 129, 2003, p.65,

2003(2), pp.13, 282, fig.12 (with structure

merly: Grand Duke Cosimo I de’ Medici;

and third quarter of the 16th century; eight

fig.2 (detail); Bier 2003(2), pp.3, 282, fig.2

analysis). Exhibited: Washington DC 1991

Medici Grand Dukes, Florence. Published:

‘Transitional’, with Mamluk and Ottoman

(with structure analysis); Istanbul 2007(2),

–92; Washington DC, Textile Museum, ‘Mamluk Rugs from Egypt’, March to

Boralevi 1983, p.282, fig.1 (with structure

designs, probably second half of the 16th

p.83, fig.1 (detail). Exhibited: Washington

analysis); London 1983, pp.41, 61–2, no.21;

century. Kurt Erdmann, whose work on

DC, Textile Museum, ‘Mamluk and Otto-

September 2003. (2) The London Mamluk

Black 1985, p.62, fig.b; Housego 1986,

these carpets remains the most detailed

man Carpets’, 1970; Washington DC 1980;

carpet with plain field and star. D. Katz,

p.231 (cited, with structure analysis);

to date, sorted Mamluk carpets into groups

Washington DC 1981; London 1983; Wash-

USA. Formerly: The Textile Gallery, London.

Boralevi 1986, pp 206–7, fig.1; Bösch 1991,

by their compositions in order to identify

ington DC 1991–92; Washington DC, Tex-

63 Two other first-period Mamluk carpets:

p.348, no.3 (cited, with structure analysis);

them more easily. His classification has

tile Museum, ‘Oriental Carpet Classics: A

(1) The Vienna Mamluk carpet with three

HALI ISSUE 157 87

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS medallions. Twelve fragments, represent-

Franz Bausback, Mannheim. Formerly:

Published: Erdmann 1930, p.14 (cited).

of the Family of Grand Duke Leopold I of

ing over three-quarters of the carpet (app-

Mercer Trust. Published: HALI 111, 2000,

The field design appears somewhat

Tuscany. Johann Zoffany, dated 1777.

roximately 223 x 550cm). Österreichisches

p.124; Sotheby’s, New York, 27 Septem-

Mamluk in style, but the borders are

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna,

Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

ber 2000, lot 48 (with structure analysis);

unlike those on any surviving carpet.

no.3771. Published: Sarre 1924, p.25.

no.T8348, acquired in 1922. Formerly:

Maastricht 2002, pp.178–9; HALI 120,

Mamluk-style carpets from Cairo depic-

71 Thompson 2006, p.130, figs.110, 111.

Habsburg Imperial Collection, Vienna. Pub-

2002, p 69; HALI 151, 2007, p.48. Exhib-

ted in European paintings: (1) The Fish-

72 The Vienna three-medallion silk Mamluk

lished: Sarre and Trenkwald 1926, vol.I,

ited: Maastricht 2002. (4) The Edirne floral

erman Presenting St Mark’s Ring to the

carpet. 290 x 540cm. Österreichisches

pls.49, 51 (two sections, shown as two

lattice carpet. 384 x 317cm. Museum of

Doge. Paris Bordone (1495–1570), pain-

Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

separate carpets); Museum für Kunst und

Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, no.172.

ted circa 1540 (not 1534, as stated con-

no.T8332. Formerly: Habsburg Imperial

Industrie 1929, p.110, no.33; Schuette

Formerly: Hazinedar Sinan Bey Mosque,

tinuously in the carpet literature and else-

collection, Vienna. Published: Riegl 1891,

1935, fig.12; Troll 1937(1), pp.221ff.

Edirne. Published: Museum of Turkish and

where). Galleria dell’Accademia, Venice.

no.360; Vienna 1892, p.12 (cited); Riegl

(design reconstituted); Troll 1937(2), fig.2

Islamic Arts 1999, vol.1, p.30, pl.47 (with

Published: Thompson 2006, p.130, fig.110

1892, p.324, pl.XXIX; Sarre 1910, p.479,

(with structure analysis); Bode and Kühnel

structure analysis). (5) The Benguiat floral

(detail). (2a-e) Portraits of Five Young Ladies

fig.16; Munich 1910, no.166, pl.77; Munich

1955, p.65, fig.45; Erdmann 1961, pp.85,

medallion on lattice carpet. 138 x 188cm.

of the House of Martinegro. Moretto da

1912, no.166, pl.77; Sarre 1921, p.77, fig.5;

103 (cited); Ellis 1967, p.10, fig.15 (with

Textile Museum, Washington DC,

Brescia (or school of), before 1543.

Kühnel 1913/14, p.452; Bode and Kühnel

structure analysis); Völker 1979, p.13, fig.1;

no.R16.3.2 (R.7.6), acquired 1932. Form-

Frescos, Palazzo Martinegro-Salvadego,

1914, p.142, fig.82; Sarre 1920, p.445,

Housego 1986, p.236 (cited, with

erly: Vitall & Leopold Benguiat Collection.

Brescia. Published: Erdmann 1940, fig.9;

fig.3; Vienna 1920, p.14, no.14; Sarre 1921,

structure analysis); Bösch 1991, p.349,

Published: American Art Association 1932,

Erdmann 1962, p.18, fig.3; Cavallo 1962,

p 77, fig.5; Bode and Kühnel 1922, p 48

no.5 (cited, with structure analysis); Gan-

lot 7(?); Textile Museum 1957, p.39, and

p.66, fig.3; Mills 1981, p.53, fig.A2; London

(cited) and fig 88 (detail); Sarre 1924, p.19,

tzhorn 1991, pp.198–201, figs.298–304;

pls.I, bottom right, and XXII (with struct-

1983, back endpaper; Thompson 2006,

fig.1; Glück and Diez 1925, p.385; Rief-

Museum für Angewandte Kunst 2001,

ure analysis); Erdmann 1961, pl.3, ill.7;

pp.132–3, figs.112a–e; Denny 2007, p.178,

stahl 1925, p.159; Sarre and Trenkwald

pp.36–41, no.1 (with details and structure

Thompson 1980, p.12 (cited); Ellis 1981,

fig.4. (3) Portrait of a Lady. Titian (Tiziano

1926, vol.I, pl.44, and pls.45, 46 (details);

analysis); HALI 125, 2002, p.43 (detail,

p.68, fig.4; Yetkin 1981, p.106, ill.65; Soth-

Vecelli, ca. 1485–1576). Kunsthistorisches

Migeon 1927, p.398 (cited); Museum für

with structure analysis); Suriano 2004,

ebys, New York, 27 September 2000, p.26

Museum, Vienna, no.33. Published: Erd-

Kunst und Industrie 1929, p.109, no.29;

p.102, fig.11; Okumura 2007, pp.246–7,

(cited); Bier 2003(2), pp.9, 282, fig.8 (with

mann 1957, p.582 (cited). (4) Portrait of a

Troll 1930, p.253 (cited); Neugebauer and

no.70 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

structure analysis); Okumura 2007, pp.218-

Man. Attributed to G.B. Moroni, mid-16th

Troll 1930, pl.25 (detail); Erdmann 1930,

Vienna, Museum für angewandte Kunst,

–21, no 60 (with details and structure

century. Whereabouts unknown. Published:

figs.2, 3; Troll 1937(2), fig.6 (detail, with

‘Symmetric and Asymmetric Knots:

analysis). Exhibited: Washington DC, Tex-

Hôtel Drouot, Paris, 18 December 1920;

structure analysis); Erdmann 1940, p.66

Oriental Knotted Carpets from the MAK

tile Museum, ‘Mamluk and Ottoman Car-

Mills 1981, p.53–4, fig.A3. (5) Family Port-

(cited); Museum für Angewandte Kunst

Collection’, 11 December 2002 to 23

pets’, May to September 1970; Washing-

rait. Sofonisba Anguissola (1532–1625),

1951, pls.40–41; Mazzini 1952, p.333

March 2003. (2) The Salvadori three-

ton DC 1991–92; Washington DC, Textile

1560. Formerly: Galerie Raczynski, Berlin.

(detail); Bode and Kühnel 1955, 1958, 1970,

medallion Mamluk carpet. 153 x 218cm,

Museum, ‘Mamluk Rugs from Egypt’,

Published: Lessing 1877, pl.21 (detail).

1984, fig.48 (detail); Erdmann 1955, fig.11

about half the original width of an end

March to September 2003. (6) The Munich

(6) The Last Supper. Ambrosius Franken

(detail); Heinz 1956, fig.7; Textile Museum

section. Victoria & Albert Museum, Lon-

Ottoman carpet in Mamluk format. 131 x

the Elder (Flanders, 1544–1618). Koninklijk

1957, pp.31, 33, 35, 37 (cited); Erdmann

don, no.150-1908. Formerly: Giuseppe

192cm. Private collection, Munich. Form-

Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp,

1960, pl.II (detail); Heinz 1962, p.42, fig.4;

Salvadori, Florence (acquired in Italy). Pub-

erly: Ostler, Munich. Published: Denny

no.136. Published: Philadelphia Museum

Schlosser 1963, pp.170–1, pl.96; Reichel

lished: Ellis 1967, p.8, fig.12 (with struct-

1979, p.6. (7) The Bernheimer medallion

of Art 1988, p.123 (cited).(7) The Doge

1969, pp.218–9, no.61 (detail); Metropolitan

ure analysis); Thompson 1980, p.14, fig.2;

ringed by palmettes carpet. 150 x 266cm.

Pietro Loredan Praying for the End of

Museum of Art 1973, p.194 (cited); Ellis 1974, p.36 (cited); Erdmann 1975, pl.II;

King 1981, p 36 (cited); Pinner and

Whereabouts unknown. Formerly: Bern-

Famine. Jacopo and/or Domenico Tintor-

Franses 1981, p.38, fig.1 (detail), p.42,

heimer Collection, Munich, acquired 1921.

etto, probably 1581–84. Palazzo Ducale,

Hein 1977, fig.2; Keir Collection 1978, p.66

fig.1 (with structure analysis); London

Published: Christie’s, London, 14 February

Venice. Published: Erdmann 1930, p.14

(cited); Tolomeo 1979, pl.XIV (detail); Curatola 1981, no.32 (detail); Denny 1982,

1983, p.59, no.17; Housego 1986, p.232,

1996, p.103, lot 99 (with structure analy-

(cited); Mills 1981, pp.53–4, fig.A4.(8) The

fig.19 (with structure analysis); Bösch

sis). (8) The Bernheimer rows of flowers

Doge Mocenigo Praying (Giving Thanks to

p.334, figs.15, 18; Zipper 1982, p.43; Field

1991, p.349, no.6 (cited, with structure

carpet. 171 x 109cm, section. Private col-

the Redeemer/Adoring the Saviour).

1983, pp.40ff. (cited); Pagnano 1983, pl.26;

analysis); Gantzhorn 1991, p.203–4,

lection, Germany. Formerly: Otto Bern-

Jacopo and/or Domenico Tintoretto, prob-

Black 1985, p.62, fig.a; ICOC 1986, p.26;

figs.311–13; Murray 2000, p.91, fig.11;

heimer Collection, Munich (until 1961).

ably 1581–84. Palazzo Ducale, Venice.

Housego 1986, p.239 (cited, with structure analysis); De Unger 1986 (with struct-

Museum für Angewandte Kunst 2001,

Published: Munich 1985, pp.20–21, no.3.

Published: Erdmann 1930, p.14 (cited).

p.38 (cited); Suriano 2004, p.103, fig.14;

65 Thompson 2006, p.164, note 148.

(9) Painting by Tintoretto at the Palazzo

ure analysis); Gantzhorn 1991, pp.155,

Paris 2004, pp.106–7, no.12 (with struc-

Some authors have erroneously reversed

Ducale, Venice [information from Dr A.

fig.224; Bösch 1991, p.348, no.2 (cited,

ture analysis); Gilles and Franses 2005,

the order of the groups (Mackie 1983,

Bruschettini, January 2008]. (10) Painting

with structure analysis); Venice 1991, p.35

p.93, fig.7; Okumura 2007, pp.222–3,

p.259; Thompson 2006, p.164, note 149),

by Palma Il Giovane. [information from Dr

(cited); Milanese 1992, p.68; Scott 1993,

no.61 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

suggesting that the more simplified ver-

A. Bruschettini, January 2008]. (11) Portrait

p.124–5; Denny and Black 1994, p.62, fig.a;

London 1983; Paris 2004.

sions are the earliest. This does not make

of a Lady. Leandro Bassano (Leandro

Noever 1995, p.122, fig.123; Curatola 1996,

64 Transitional Mamluk-Ottoman carpets:

sense, because several of the rugs with

da Ponte, 1557–1622). Whereabouts

p.472 (cited); Stone 1997, p.140 (cited);

(1) The Berlin lattice carpet. 128 x 185cm.

simpler designs and only three colours

unknown. Published: Sotheby’s, London,

Franses 1997, p.86, note 4 (cited); Little

Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin, no.KGM

relate through their border patterns and

13 December 1978, lot 37; Mills 1981,

1998, p.69; Milanese 1999, p.50; Museum

1884.899. Published: Erdmann 1940,

colours to the rugs with Ottoman designs

pp.53–4, fig.A5. (12) Portrait of Daniel

für Angewandte Kunst 2001, pp.42–5,

fig.18; Textile Museum 1957, p.39 (cited);

that continued to be made in the same

Hopfer II. Leandro Bassano, ca. 1595.

figs.43, 45 (with structure analysis); Mallary

Essen 1961, no.393; Berlin 1967, no.85;

workshops as the Mamluk-style rugs in

Whereabouts unknown. Formerly: Fairfax

2003, p.105, fig.2 (detail); Suriano 2004,

Museum of Islamic Art 1988, pp.65, 213,

the second half of the 16th century.

Murray collection. Published: Murray auc-

p.95, fig.2; Okumura 2007, pp.228–9 (with

no.70 (with structure analysis); Sotheby’s,

66 Housego 1986.

tion, Berlin, November 1929; Erdmann

structure analysis). Exhibited: Munich 1910; Vienna, Museum für angewandte Kunst,

New York, 27 September 2000, p.26

67 Thompson 1980.

1930, p.14 (cited); Mills 1981, pp.53–4,

(cited). Exhibited: Essen 1961; Berlin 1967.

68 Suriano 2004, p.96.

no.A6 (cited). (13) Portrait of Alvisi Cor-

‘Symmetric and Asymmetric Knots: Orien-

(2) The Munich lattice carpet. 194 x 230cm.

69 Ellis 1967, pp.2–20.

radini. Leandro Bassano.Museo Civico,

tal Knotted Carpets from the MAK Collect-

Bayerisches Nationalmuseum, Munich.

70 The oldest illustration of what may be

Padua. Published: Mills 1981, pp.53–4,

ion’, 11 December 2002 to 23 March 2003.

Published: Erdmann 1940, fig.19; Textile

a Mamluk rug is in Vittore Carpaccio’s

no.A7 (cited).(14) The Duff Family. 16th/

73 Sarre 1924, pl.12, fig.2.

Museum 1957, p.39 (cited); Hubel 1971,

Betrothal of the Virgin, ca. 1504–1507, but

17th century? Duke of Fife. Published:

74 Seven first-period, ten-second period

p.287, fig.150 (with structure analysis).

firm identification is not possible.

Beattie 1964, p.7, fig.3; Philadelphia Mus-

and 14 third-period. The exact number is

(3) The Mercer lattice carpet. 239 x 338cm.

Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, no.169.

eum of Art 1988, p.123 (cited). (15) Portrait

difficult to determine because several are

88 HALI ISSUE 157

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS incomplete. To date only one sur viving

p.55.

Collection, Munich, acquired 1911. Pub-

91 Erdmann 1960/1962, figs.138, 139

Mamluk with five large medallions is

79 Whiting 1981, p.55.

lished: Christie’s, London, 14 February

and pl.VII; Bennett 1978, pp.117–20;

known, the Faenza-Simonetti carpet in

80 Three circular Mamluk carpets:

1996, p.109, lot 103 (with structure

Denny 1986, pp.245–9; Spuhler, in Mus-

the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

(1) The Barbieri circular Mamluk carpet.

analysis). (2) Mamluk carpet fragment.

eum of Islamic Art 1988, p.112. Adher-

York. It is possible that some of the sur -

284 x 292cm. Bruschettini Foundation,

49 x 191cm, field section. MIAQ, no.CA06.

ents of the Bursa/Istanbul theory also

viving fragments, including many of the

Genoa, no.T48. Formerly: Piero Barbieri

Published: Lefevre, London, 31 October

seem to have overlooked other pertinent

first-period examples, may have come

Collection, Genoa. Published: Erdmann

1980, lot 1 (cited); Sotheby’s, London, 29

evidence. For example, although Kühnel

from carpets with three or even five large

1966, p.220, fig.271; Erdmann 1970,

April 1981, lot 100; Christie’s, London, 30

points out Erdmann’s interesting discov-

medallions. Almost half of the three- and

p.198, fig.252; Sotheby’s, London, 12

April 1998, lot 24a.

ery that “an inventory of the Saray in

five-medallion carpets can be traced back

October 1982, lot 38; HALI 5/2, 1982,

86 Textile Museum 1957, p.41. The inven-

Istanbul, dated 1680, mentions twenty

to Italian collections.

p.203, fig.37; London 1983, p.63, no.24;

tories Kühnel refers to are quoted by

silk prayer carpets from Egypt” (Textile

75 Three Mamluk-style rugs with direct-

HALI 42, 1988, p.99; Bösch 1991, p.382,

Erdmann 1938. For the information on

Museum 1957, p.42, quoting from Erd-

ional designs: (1) The Bernheimer trees

no.94; Okumura 2007, pp.166–7, no.40;

the 1688 Commercial Register, Kühnel

mann 1938, p.197, no.24), he does not

carpet. 163 x 226cm. Bruschettini Found-

Spallanzani [i.p.], fig.3. Exhibited: London

refers to Erdmann 1938, p.198. The

examine it more closely. The shininess of

ation, Genoa, no.T36. Formerly: Bern-

1983. (2) The Olmutz circular Mamluk

statements relating to the mosques are

Egyptian wool is deceptive: it looks very

heimer Collection, Munich, no.56180 158/

carpet. Diameter 270cm. Kremsier Castle,

from 1573 and about 1650 – Kühnel here

different to Turkish wool and is often

225; Elio Cittone, Milan. Published: Bern-

Czech Republic. Formerly: Collection of

refers to Erdmann 1938, p.193.

mistaken for silk. Furthermore, rugs with

heimer 1959, pl 4; Schürmann [1960],

the Archbishops of Olmutz. Published:

87 Kühnel (Textile Museum 1957, p.57,

silk fringes were often called ‘silk rugs’. It

pl.20; Ellis 1967, p.11, fig.16 (with struct-

Erdmann 1970, p.199 (cited); Stulc 2006,

note 1), quoting Erdmann 1938, p.187,

is possible, therefore, that the Ottoman

ure analysis); Suriano 2004, p.97, figs.5, 5a.

pp.413–15, figs.1–4. (3) The Milan circular

no.5.

niche rugs in the Topkapı Saray Museum

(2) The Bode keyhole niche rug with

Mamluk carpet. 278 x 226cm. MIAQ,

88 Kühnel (Textile Museum 1957, p.57,

and the Museum of Turkish and Islamic

cloudbands. 120 x 162cm, wool pile on a

no.TE07. Formerly: Louise Michael,

note 2), quoting Erdmann 1938, p.194,

Arts, Istanbul, are the last two survivors

wool foundation. Museum of Islamic Art,

Milan; The Textile Gallery, London.

no.17.

of the twenty.

Berlin, inv. no.KGM 1888.30. Formerly:

81 The Clark circular Cairene Ottoman

89 By 1585, Cairo had been part of the

92 As far as I know, both silk and cotton

Wilhelm Bode; Kunstgewerbemuseum,

carpet. 262 x 224cm. Corcoran Gallery of

Ottoman Empire for more than sixty

can be spun in either direction. S-spun

Berlin. Published: Erdmann 1940, p.75,

Art, Washington DC, W.A Clark Collect-

years. The Sultan in Istanbul controlled

silk tends to pre-date Z-spun in European

fig.21; Zick 1961(1), pp.7–8, fig.1 and

ion, no.26.294. Published: Troll 1937(2);

the activities of the crafts guilds of his

silks; the cotton used on Egyptian carpets

note 7 (with structure analysis); Ellis

Erdmann 1970, p.198 (cited); Bennett

Empire wherever they were based, and

was presumably produced locally, and

1969, p.8, fig.5 and p. 20, note 6 (with

1978, p.117; Yetkin 1981, p.105, ill. 63;

would have had no need to bring weav-

the reels of spun silk were imported,

structure analysis); Washington DC 1974,

HALI 127, 2003, p.41, fig.3; Thompson

ers to Istanbul. However, in 1582, on the

generally from Iran.

p.130, fig.19; Thompson 1980, p.9, fig.2;

2006, p.172, fig.157 (detail). Exhibited:

occasion of the circumcision of his son,

93 Pinner and Franses 1981. The fact that

Enderlein 1971 (cited); Milan 1981, p.24,

Washington DC, Arthur M. Sackler Gallery,

a grand festival was organised for Sultan

some Cairene Ottoman rugs have silk

fig.7; London 1983, p.60, no.19 (detail);

‘The World at Our Feet. A Selection of

Murad III at the Hippodrome in Istanbul.

warps, wool wefts and some cotton pile

Boralevi 1986, p.216, fig.12; Philadelphia

Carpets from the Corcoran Gallery of

The festival included musicians, dancers,

was not addressed.

Museum of Art 1988, p.78 (cited);

Art’, 4 April to 6 July 2003.

tightrope walkers and all the guilds of

94 The Medici Ottoman carpet. 330 x

Enderlein 1988, p.34, fig.22; Mills 1991,

82 Diameter 291cm. Boralevi’s lecture at

the Empire. Floats passed before the

995cm. Pitti Palace, Florence, no.5278.

p.88, fig.3; Enderlein 1993, p.92, fig.15;

the HALI Fair 2006 and private communi-

Sultan, while the guilds demonstrated

Published: Boralevi 1983, pp.282–3 (with

Berlin 1995, pp.25, 36. no.16; Ölçer et al.

cation. The inventory is to be published

their skills before dignitaries from all over

structure analysis); London 1983, p.41

1996, p.181, pl.128; Suriano 2004, p.94;

in Spallanzani [i.p.].

the world and many thousands of

and pp.83–5, no.56; Boralevi 1986,

Istanbul 2007(1), p.119, fig.70, p.161,

83 Erdmann 1938, vol.V, pt.2, p.189.

spectators. There is no specific record of

pp.205–11, figs.2, 4. The carpet is in an

no.E1. Exhibited: London 1983; Berlin

Erdmann took the reference from

carpet weavers at this festival, but I refer

unused condition and appears as new,

1995; Istanbul 2007(1). (3) The Padua Ark

‘Urkunden und Regesten aus der K.K.

to it to demonstrate that the Sultan was

with bright and gaudy colours.

curtain. 109 x 138cm, wool pile on a

Hofbibliothek’, in Jahrbuch der Kunst-

interested in the work of the craftsmen

95 Boralevi 1983, p.282: ‘Tappeto grande

wool foundation. Padua Synagogue,

histonschen Sammlungen des Aller-

of his Empire. It is quite possible that

Cairno buono lungo b17 et largo b.5 e

Padua. Published: Mitteilungen 1900,

hochsten, Kaiserhauses 7 (1888), p.264,

the finest carpet weavers in the Empire,

2/3, avuto dal Gen. Cav Da Verrazzano

p.24, fig.15; Landsberger 1945–6, p.368,

entry no.288: “Two beautiful Algerian

those in Cairo, were brought to the cap-

Commissario delle Galere addi 31 luglio’.

fig.4; Kendrick and Barnett 1951, p.53,

carpets, that [an important military man,

ital to present their work to the Sultan at

The cited size exactly matches that of

note 66 (cited); Gutmann 1970, p.144

equivalent to a general] from Genova

a later date, and that the document citing

the actual carpet.

(cited); Goodenough 1960, vol.4, p.138,

‘handed over’, with several colours and

the eleven rug masters refers to such a

96 Whiting 1981, p.55, found that the

fig.103; Boralevi 1984, figs.1, 2; Boralevi

yellow woollen fringe, for a round table.”

visit – there seems to be no evidence

red of all five Mamluks in the Victoria

1986, pp.211–3, fig.5; Yaniv 1989; Ferrara

84 There is a slight chance that the

that they stayed in Istanbul or anywhere

and Albert Museum, London, had been

1990, no.119, pp.208–9; Venice 1993,

Barbieri carpet is the one mentioned in

else in the region for any length of time.

dyed with lac. The red of a Mamluk

pp.327–9, no.192; Papotti 1993, p.69;

the 1587 Medici archive, and that the

90 Martin 1908. Yet, when discussing the

carpet in the Wher Collection had been

HALI 73, 1994, p.101 (cited); Felton 1997,

carpet in Kremsier may be one of Ferdi-

very fine blue-ground Cairene Ottoman

dyed with cochineal. The Wher carpet

p.19; Washington DC 2002, p.54, fig.20;

nand’s, also originally from the Medici.

carpet in the Musée des Arts Décoratifs,

has a minor guard border with the

Prato 2006, p.44 (detail), pp.94–5, no.21;

Marco Spallanzani’s article ‘Carpets at

Paris, he states that: ‘not only large

çintamani design normally associated

Paris 2006, pp.182, 323–4, cat.82; Venice

the Medici Court in the second half of

carpets were made, but also prayer car-

with the Ottoman period. Whiting (p.56)

2007, p.194, no.65; Denny 2007, pp.182,

the sixteenth century’, to be published in

pets, of which some fine examples are

tells us that: “all three of the main

323–4, cat. 82; Pordenone 2007, p.71.

the forthcoming Islamic Art (Bruschettini

in different collections...some have simple

species of insect dye were theoretically

Inscribed with Verse 20 of Psalm 118:

Foundation, Genoa). Spallanzani notes

uncoloured prayer niches, others are richly

available for use in these carpets:

“This is the Gate of the Lord through

that: “Francesco I …inventory of 1587…

decorated. As these carpets form of them-

kermes from Spain, lac from India and

which the righteous shall enter”.

passed to the Grand Duke Ferdinand,

selves a separate group in design and

genuine ‘cochineal’ from Mexico’. ...

76 Riefstahl 1925, pp.159–62.

refers to ‘Un tappeto tondo, cairino, di

technique widely different from all other

Cochineal, even when it had become

77 See note 64, nos.1–4.

diametro di br.5’ [290cm].”

carpets made at the same time in Asia

familiar in Europe, was a very valuable

78 The Arhan Mamluk carpet. 251 x

85 Two ‘study piece’ Mamluk carpets in

Minor...’ (p.333). He goes on to write that

commodity, and the earliest shipments

308cm. MIAQ, no.CA22. Formerly: Yaya

the MIAQ: (1) The Bernheimer Mamluk

Sarre believed that these carpets were

beginning in 1530, would have aroused

Arhan, Istanbul; Arhan family collection,

carpet with medallion and bands of cyp-

made in Damascus. This only adds to the

extreme interest in Spain... Böhmer has

Stockholm; Wher Collection; The Textile

ress and palm trees. 137 x 204cm.

confusion in the first writings on the

reported that little or no use of cochineal

Gallery, London. Published: Whiting 1981,

MIAQ, no.CA04. Formerly: Bernheimer

early history of carpets.

or other insect dyes occurred in Turkish

HALI ISSUE 157 89

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS villages before 1850 when cultivation

ses 1981, p.41 (cited); London 1983, p.66,

(‘symmetrically knotted’).(11) The Dussel-

Mills 1981, p.54, no.B6; Mills 1997, p.73,

began in the Mediterranean region.”

no.28; Black 1985, p.52, fig.6b; Pinner

dorf medallion lattice rug. Whereabouts

fig.2. (7) The Presentation in the Temple.

97 Whiting 1981, pp.55–6.

1986, p.6, fig.9; Philadelphia Museum of

unknown. Formerly: City art collection,

Bonifazio Veronese, first half 16th century.

98 See note 64, no.6.

Art 1988, pp.4–7, pl.1 (with structure

Dusseldorf. Published: Thompson 2006,

National Museum, Stockholm. Published:

99 The Hackwood Park Cairene Ottoman

analysis); Thompson 2006, p.138, fig.117.

p.156, fig.151. (12) The Cairo two-octagon

Mills 1981, p.55, fig.B6 (cited). (8) Portrait

medallion carpet. 281 x 517cm. MIAQ,

Exhibited: New York 1910; London 1983.

carpet. Museum of Islamic Art, Cairo.

of a Man. Francesco Beccaruzzi, first

no.CA05. Formerly: Lord Camrose Col-

(4) The Paris four-and-one medallions rug.

Published: Moustapha 1949; Thompson

half 16th century. Galleria degli Uffizi,

lection, Hackwood House, Hampshire.

141 x 207cm. Tabibnia Collection, Milan.

2006, pp.146, 148, figs.136, 142.

Florence, no.908. Published: Mills 1981,

Published: Christie’s, Hackwood House,

Formerly: Private collection, Paris; Vigo

(13) The Cairo compartment design carpet.

p.54, no.B5 (detail); Thompson 2006,

21 April 1998, lot 1118; HALI 99, 1998,

Art Galleries, London; Charles Grant Ellis

Museum of Islamic Art, Cairo. Published:

p.135, fig.114. (9) Saint Antoninus Giving

p.123.

Collection, Kingston, NY; Wher Collection.

Bode and Kühnel 1955, p.76, fig.55.

Alms. Lotto Lorenzo, 1542. Church of

100 The Bernheimer Cairene Ottoman

Published: Washington DC 1973, fig.24;

(14) The Chihil Sultun niche rug with Kufic

Santi Giovanni e Paolo, Venice. Published:

medallion rug. 132 x 191cm. MIAQ,

Foster 1979, pl.V; Pinner and Franses

inscription. 105 x 141cm. Carpet Museum,

Mills 1981, p.54, no.B4 (cited); Thomp-

no.CA63. Formerly: Consul Otto Bern-

1981, p.41, fig.g; Pinner 1986, p.6, fig.8;

Tehran. Formerly: Chihil Sutun Kiosk,

son 2006, p.142, fig.125.(10) Venetian

heimer, Munich, acquired 1919; Bern-

Philadelphia Museum of Art 1988, p.6,

Esfahan. Published: Erdmann 1966,

Senator. Sofonisba Anguissola (ca. 1535

heimer family collection, Munich; private

fig.1c; Paris 1989, pp.40–41 (with struct-

pp.87–93 (‘Turkey, late 19th century’);

–1626). Burghley House Collection, Stam-

collection. Published: Hamburg 1950,

ure analysis); Thompson 2006, pp.124–5,

Ellis 1967, pp.2–20 (‘Turkey, late 19th

ford. Published: HALI 94, 1997, p.61; Thompson 2006, p.134, fig.113. (11)

no.9, pp.22–3, pl.8; Erdmann 1955,

pl.12 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

century’); Gans-Ruedin 1978, pp.144–5;

no.130; Bernheimer 1959, pl.5; Yetkin

Washington DC 1973; Paris, Institut du

Mills 1997, p.72, fig.1; Franses 1999,

Lucia, Minerva and Europa Anguissola

1981, p.116, no.73; Christie’s, London, 14

Monde Arabe, 1989–1994; Milan 2006.

p.50, fig.31; Thompson 2006, p.137,

Playing Chess. Sofonisba Anguissola,

February 1996, lot 83; Christie’s, London,

Carbon-14 dated 1460–1640 (95% confi-

fig.116. Inscription reads “Hasten to

1555. Muzeum Narodowe, Poznan.

29 April 2004, lot 101.

dence). (5) The Bernheimer four-and-one

repent before death”.

Published: Ellis 1997, p.77, fig.9.

101 King 1985, pp.49–52.

octagons carpet. 112 x 116cm, incomp-

107 Eskenazi 1986 wrote that the Domes

(12) The Virgin with Angelic Musicians.

102 See Pinner 1986, pp.302–3. At least

lete. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

and Squinches rug could have been made

Unknown Flemish artist, probably mid-

fourteen compartment design carpets can

no.I.33/60. Formerly: Bernheimer Collec-

for the opening of the Divrigi Mosque

16th century. Museo Arqueológico

be identified in the inventories of Cardinal

tion, Munich. Published: Bernheimer

(1228–9) or that it could be a 15th century

Nacional, Madrid, no.51967. Published:

Wolsey, Margaret of Austria, Archduchess

1959, fig.2; Ellis 1963, figs.1, 3, 5; Ellis

carpet copying earlier architectural orna-

Thompson 2006, p.143, fig.127.

Margarethe of Mechelen, King Henry VIII

1967, p.19, note 33 (cited); Erdmann

ment. I find it unlikely that a rug with such

109 Thompson (2006, p.149) mentions

of England, Anna von Ungarn and Arch-

1970, p.154, fig.198; Museum of Islamic

a pattern would have been made for the

the ‘Munich’ and ‘Wind’ carpets as

duke Ferdinand II, as well as in Haram

Art 1988, pp.67 and 217, pl.74 (with

mosque. We know of the Safavid Shah

examples of the ‘international’ style.

and Florentine documents.

structure analysis); Pinner and Franses

Tahmasp’s gift to the congregation of the

They have some similarities in design to

103 Milan 1981, p.25, fig.8.

1980, fig.209, p.110; HALI 71, 1993,

Süleyman Mosque in Istanbul of a multi-

the para-Mamluks, but their technique

104 See: Mills 1981, pp.53–5; Thompson

p.119; Thompson 2006, p.136, fig.115.

niche prayer carpet (saf), and of the saf

and colours seem to place them with

2006, p.152, fig.146.

(6) The Blum medallions and lattice carpet.

carpets made in Ushak by order of Sultan

rugs attributed to west Anatolia.

105 Twelve of these appear in paintings

255 x 285cm. Bruschettini Foundation,

Selim II in the early 1570s for the Edirne

110 Thompson has spent many years

by just two artists and may represent

Genoa. Formerly: Mrs Harry Blum, USA;

Mosque. But a two-octagon rug is a less

studying Turkmen rugs from west

only two examples: (1) Simon Kick, Self

The Textile Gallery, London. Published:

likely gift or commission. Most of the rugs

Turkestan and has written possibly the

Portait, 1645–1650. National Gallery of

Sotheby’s, New York, 1 May 1982, lot

preserved in mosques were given by the

finest book on this subject (Mackie and

Ireland, Dublin, no.164550. (2) Pietro Pao-

295; HALI 4/4, 1982, p.400; Thompson

congregation, occasionally from the estate

Thompson 1980).

lini (1603–1681), Self Portrait. Published:

2006, p.157, fig.153. (7) The Myers med-

and in memory of a deceased parent. This

111 I am very uncomfortable with the

Thompson 2006, pp.152–3, figs.146, 147,

allions carpet. 98 x 45cm, fragment. Tex-

suggests that many of the rugs found in

idea that these rugs were ever part of

see also p.155, note 138.

tile Museum, Washington DC, no.R7.21

mosques may have been at least a gen-

the Turkmen design tradition from Iran.

106 Para-Mamluk carpets: (1) The Divrigi

(R34.32.1). Formerly: Rhode Island School

eration old at the time of their bequest.

However, it is easy to see a connection

domes and squinches carpet. 185 x

of Design (1953, by exchange); George

108 Para-Mamluk carpets depicted in

between the ivory-ground ‘Seljuk’ car-

195cm, incomplete. Vakıflar Museum,

Hewitt Myers, Washington DC. Published:

European paintings (in date order):

pets possibly from Konya and the Turk-

Istanbul, no.A-217. Formerly: Ulu Mosque,

Textile Museum 1957, p.77, pl.XLV; Ellis

(1) Mark Enthroned with Saints. Giovanni

men tradition, and there is a clear link

Divrigi. Published: Ellis 1967; Vakıflar

1967, p.12 (cited); Pinner and Franses

Martini da Udine, 1501. The Cathedral,

between Iranian paintings of the 15th

Museum 1988, pp.40–45, 9, 180–1, pl.2

1981, p.41 (cited); HALI 94, 1997,

Udine. Published: Mills 1997, p.73 (detail).

century and the so-called ‘small-pattern

(with structure analysis); Philadelphia

p.61; Thompson 2006, p.139, fig.118.

(2) Altarpiece. Lorenzo Lotto, 1505. Church

Holbein’ carpets of western Anatolia. To

Museum of Art 1988, p.9, fig.2a; Eskenazi

(8) The Campana twelve-and-one medal-

of Santa Christina al Tivarone, Treviso.

connect para-Mamluk rugs to Iran through

1986; Franses and Bennett 1988, p.37;

lions carpet. 232 x 302cm, incomplete.

(3) The Doge Loredan and Four Advisors.

the use of an open ‘Kufesque’ and inter-

Thompson 2006, p.39, fig.2, pp.146–7,

Bruschettini Foundation, Genoa, no.T38.

Giovanni Bellini (ca. 1430–1516), dated

lace border is problematic when the pat-

figs.137–9. (2) The Divrigi multiple lattice

Formerly: Michele Campana, Milan. Pub-

1507. Gemäldegalerie, Berlin. Published:

tern was part of an international style

carpet. 230 x 380cm, incomplete. Vakıflar

lished: Erdmann 1961, fig.31; Ellis 1967,

Nemes, Munich, 16 June 1931; Mills

that stretched from west Anatolia to India

Museum, Istanbul, no.A-344. Formerly:

p.12 (cited); Viale and Viale 1969, fig.147;

1981, p.53, fig.A1; HALI 56, 1991, p.133

in the late 14th and early 15th centuries.

Ulu Mosque, Divrigi. Published: Ellis 1967,

Pinner and Franses 1981, p.52, fig.n; HALI

(detail); Thompson 2006, p.141, fig.122;

112 The term ‘compartment’ (and the

p.19, note 33 (cited); Vakıflar Museum

93, 1997, p.75, fig.7 (detail); HALI 94,

Arcangeli 2006, p.124. (4) The Story of

earlier ‘chequerboard’) was coined by

1988, pp.34–9, 178–9, pl.1 (with struct-

1997, p.61 (cited); Thompson 2006, p.140,

the Amazons. Vittore Carpaccio, 1517.

Ernst Kühnel.

ure analysis); Thompson 2006, p.146,

fig.121. (9) The Dresden octagons rug.

Musée Jacquemart André, Paris. Pub-

113 Some carpets with other Syrian

fig.133.(3) The Williams four-and-one

44.5 x 40.5cm, oval fragment. Kunst-

lished: Mills 1981, p.54, no.B2 (cited).

designs: (1) The Istanbul three-medallion

octagons rug. 125 x 178cm. Philadelphia

gewerbe Museum, Dresden, no.343.

(5) The Prothonotary Apostolic, Giovanni

carpet 1. 293 x 770cm. Museum of Turk-

Museum of Art, no.55-65-2. Joseph Lees

Published: Lessing, 1887; HALI 71, 1993,

Giuliano. Lorenzo Lotto, 1519–20 or after

ish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, nos 844-

Williams Memorial Collection, Philadelphia.

p.106, fig.1; Thompson 2006, p.139,

1530(?). National Gallery, London, no.1105.

846-850-869 (four pieces). Published:

Published: New York 1910, p.11, no.8;

fig.120. Exhibited: Hamburg, 7th ICOC,

Published: Erdmann 1940, fig.8; Mills

Ölçer et al. 1996, pp.118–21, pl.86;

Erdmann 1930, fig.8; Erdmann 1961,

1993. (10) The Konya rug. Small fragment,

1981, p.54, no.B3 (detail). (6) The Rich

Thompson 2006, p.155, fig.149; Istanbul

fig.33; Ellis 1963, fig.2; Ellis 1967, p.19,

framed with a Beyshehir fragment and

Man’s Feast, or Dives Feasting. Bonifazio

2007(2), p.53, no.31. (2) The Istanbul

note 33 (cited); Metropolitan Museum of

several others. Ethnographic Museum,

Veronese (Bonifazio di Pitati, 1487– 1553),

three-medallion carpet 2. 292 x 765cm.

Art 1973, fig.15; Ellis 1978, p.32, fig.7;

Konya. Published: Ellis 1967, p.19, note

first half 16th century. Galleria dell’Accad-

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts,

Atil 1980, p.312, ill. 178; Pinner and Fran-

33 (cited); Thompson 2006, p.139, fig.119

emia, Venice, cat. 326, no.291. Published:

Istanbul, nos 845-847-848-849-851-868

90 HALI ISSUE 157

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS (six pieces). Published: Museum of

WORKS CITED

Turkish and Islamic Arts 1999, pl.1;

Adams, Philip R., ‘A Panorama of Spanish

Wilhelm von Bode und die Berliner

Bode, Wilhelm von and Ernst Kühnel,

Thompson 2006, p.155, fig.150; Istanbul

Art’, in Apollo, vol.XCIII, pp.268–79,

Teppichsammlung, exhibition cata-

Vorderasiatische Knüpfteppiche aus

2007(2), p.54, no.32. (3) The Berlin

April 1971.

logue, 18 October 1995, text by

Älterer Zeit, 4th ed., revised, Klink-

Volkmar Enderlein, Bildheft der

hardt & Biermann, Braunschweig,

cloudband carpet. 163 x 411cm.

Alexander Collection, Berkeley, A Fore-

Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

shadowing of 21st Century Art, text

Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin –

no.86.601. Published: Zick-Nissen 1966,

by Christopher Alexander, OUP, New

Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Heft 84,

p.111, fig.9; Museum für Islamische Kunst 1971/1979, no.583; Museum of

York/London, 1993.

Al-Himyari, Ibn ‘Abd al-Mun’im, Kitab al-

Gebr. Mann Verlag, Berlin, 1995.

Beselin, Annette, ‘Bode auf den zweiten

1955.

Bode, Wilhelm von and Ernst Kühnel, Antique Rugs from the Near East, 4th ed., translated by Charles Grant

Islamic Art 1988, pp.66 and 216, pl.73.

Rawd al-Mitar: La Péninsule Ibérique

Blick’, in Islamische Kunst in Berliner

(4) Single-niche fragments from a saf.

au Moyen-Âge, edited and translated

Sammlungen – 100 Jahre Museum

by E. Lévi-Provencal, Leyden, 1938.

für Islamische Kunst in Berlin,

Antique Rugs from the Near East,

pp.66–71, edited by Jens Kröger and

translated by Charles Grant Ellis, 4th

D. Heiden, Berlin, 2005.

edition, revised, Bell & Sons, London,

(a) 69 x 60cm. Wher Collection.

Formerly: Garry Muse, Tucson; The

American Art Association, New York, Cata-

Textile Gallery, London. Published: HALI

logue of the Celebrated Collection of...

4/1, 1981, p.56. (b) Museum of Turkish

M. E. Eymonaud...Mr Vital Benguiat...,

Bernheimer, Otto, Alte Teppiche des 16.

and Islamic Arts, Istanbul. (5) The Salva-

auction catalogue, 8 to 10 April 1920.

bis 18. Jahrhunderts der Firma L.

dore palmettes carpet. 82 x 74cm and 83

American Art Association/Anderson

Bernheimer, Munich, 1959.

Bier, Carol, ‘Beyond the Pyramids’,

x 54cm, two fragments. Keir Collection,

Galleries, New York, Rare Ancient

Ham. Formerly: Salvadore, Florence.

Rugs, The V. & L. Benguiat Collection,

review of the exhibition ‘Beyond the

Published: Keir Collection 1978, pp.77–8,

auction catalogue, 23 April 1932.

Pyramids: Geometry & Design in

pl.39 (‘Z-spun, asymmetrically knotted’).

[Anon], Turkish Handwoven Carpets,

(6) The Salvadore eight-pointed star med-

Catalogue No: 2, selected by Dogan

Mamluk & Ottoman Carpets’, at The Textile Museum, Washington DC, 1

Ellis, London, 1958.

Bode, Wilhem von and Ernst Kühnel,

1970.

Bode, Wilhem von, and Ernst Kühnel, Antique Rugs from the Near East, 4th edition with revisions, translated

by Charles Grant Ellis, London, 1984.

Boileau, Etienne, Le Livre des Métiers de la ville de Paris, Paris, 1897.

Boralevi , Alberto, ‘The Discovery of Two

allion carpet. 180 x 150cm, incomplete.

Yilmazkaya, Sahika Ünal and Güran

June 1991 to February 1992, in HALI

Great Carpets, The Cairene Carpets

Keir Collection, Ham. Formerly: Salvadore,

Erbek, Turkish Republic, Ministry of

57, pp.123–5, June 1991.

of the Medici’, in HALI 5/3, pp.282–3,

Florence. Published: Keir Collection 1978,

State & Ministry of Culture and

pp.78–9, pl.40 (‘Z-spun, symmetrically

Tourism, Ankara, January 1988.

Bier, Carol, ‘Elements of Plane Symmetry in Oriental Carpets’, in Textile Museum

Arcangeli, Catherina Schmidt, ‘“Orientalist”

Journal, vol.31, pp.53–70, 1992.

som carpet. 126 x 343cm. Metropolitan

Painting in Venice, 15th–17th Cent-

Bier, Carol, ‘Approaches to Understanding

Museum of Art, New York, no.1990.169.

uries’, in Venice and the Islamic World,

Formerly: Marshall & Marilyn R. Wolf,

828–1797, pp.121–39, edited by

New York. Published: Bulletin of the

Stefano Carboni, New York, 2006.

knotted’). (7) The Wolf palmette and blos-

Metropolitan Museum, New York, Fall

Aslanapa, Oktay, Turkish Arts, translated

Oriental Carpets’, in Arts of Asia,

1983.

Boralevi, Alberto, ‘Un tappeto ebraico italo-egizano’, in Critica d’Arte, XLIX, no.2, July to September 1984.

Boralevi, Alberto, ‘Three Egyptian Carpets

vol.26, no.1, pp.66–81, 1996(1).

in Italy’, in Oriental Carpet & Textile

Bier, Carol, ‘Symmetry and Pattern: Art

Studies II: Carpets of the Mediter-

of Oriental Carpets’, in Arts & The

ranean Countries 1400– 1600,

1991, p.12. (8) The Divrigi palmettes in

by Herman Kreider, Dogan Kardes,

Islamic World, no.29, pp 37–40,

pp.205–20, edited by Robert Pinner

lattice carpet. 228 x 383cm. Vakıflar

Istanbul, 1961.

Autumn 1996(2).

and Walter B. Denny, HALI/OCTS,

Museum, Istanbul, no.A-172. Formerly: Ulu Mosque, Divrigi. Published: Vakıflar Museum 1998, pp.124–31, 292–3, pl.58 (with structure analysis).(9) The Divrigi

Aslanapa, Oktay, Turkish Art and Architecture, Faber and Faber, London, 1971.

Aslanapa, Oktay, One Thousand Years of Turkish Carpets, Eren, Istanbul, 1988.

Bier, Carol, ‘Andalusian Harmony’, in HALI, 127, pp.42–3, 2003(1).

Bier, Carol, ‘Jewels of the Textile Museum’s Collection. I. Mamluk Rugs

London, 1986.

Boralevi, Alberto, ‘Two of a Kind’, in HALI, 103, p.79, March/April 1999.

Bösch, Marion, Mamlukenteppiche.

from Egypt’, in A World of Oriental

Probleme der Teppichforschung am

Carpets & Textiles, edited by Murray

Beispiel einer Gruppe des 15. bis 16.

Beattie, May H., ‘Britain and the Oriental

L. Eiland, Jr., catalogue of exhibitions

Jahrhunderts aus dem östlichen

Published: Vakıflar Museum 1998,

Carpet’, in Leeds Art Calendar, no.55,

at the Xth International Conference on

Mittelmeerraum, Karl-Franzens

pp.124–31, 294–5, pl.59 (with structure

pp.4–15, 1964.

Oriental Carpets, 17–21 April 2003,

Universität Graz, Institut für Kunst-

palmettes and cloudbands rug. 200 x 293cm. Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul, no.A-216. Formerly: Ulu Mosque, Divrigi.

Atıl, Esin (ed), Turkish Art, Washington DC, 1980.

analysis). (10) The Muse cartouche border

Beattie, May H., ‘The “Admiral” Rugs of

carpet. 15 x 46cm, border section. MIAQ,

Spain. An Analysis and Classification

pp.1–16, 282, 10th ICOC, Washington DC, 2003(2).

Bier, Carol, ‘Spanish and Mamluk Carpets.

geschichte, 1991 (Doctoral thesis).

Bösch, Marion, ‘Mamluk Carpets – Typology and Dating’, in 7th International

no TE14. Formerly: Garry Muse, Tuscson;

of Their Field Designs’, in Oriental Car-

The Textile Gallery, London; Wher Col-

pet & Textile Studies II: Carpets of

Comparisons of Decoration and

Conference on Oriental Carpets,

lection. Published: HALI 4/1, 1981, p.56;

the Mediterranean Countries 1400–

Structure’, in Ghereh, 36, pp.9–17,

Papers, Presentations, pp.79–92,

Thompson 2006, p.156, fig.152.

1600, pp.271–89, dited by Robert

2004.

Academic Committee of the 7th

(11) The New York palmette and blossom

Pinner and Walter B. Denny, HALI/

carpet. 198 x 310cm. Eberhart Herrmann,

OCTS, London, 1986.

Emmetten. Published: HALI 69, 1993, p.68; Sotheby’s, New York, 15 December 1994, lot 92; Munich 1997, pl.28 (with

Bennett, Ian (ed.), Rugs and Carpets of the World, Ferndale Editions, London, 1978.

Black, David (ed.), World Rugs and Carpets, Feltham, Middlesex, 1985.

ICOC, Düsseldorf, 1996.

Bunt, Cyril G.E., Hispano-Moresque

Bode, Wilhelm, ‘Ein Altpersischer Teppich

Fabrics, F. Lewis, Leigh-on-Sea, 1966.

im Besitz der Königlichen Museen zu

Camman, Schuyler, V.R., ‘Symbolic Meani-

Berlin, Studien zur Geschichte der

ngs in Oriental Rug Patterns: Parts

Westasiatischen Knüpfteppiche’ in

I–III’, in Textile Museum Journal, vol.III,

Silk, part 4’, in HALI 35, pp.32–43 and

Jahrbuch der Kgl. Preuszischen

no.3, pp.5–55, December 1972.

(1) The Divrigi eight-pointed star medal-

pp.124–7, with additional captions by

Kunstsammlunger, XIII, pp.26–49,

lion and four octagons carpet. 236 x

Kurt Erdmann, 1987.

108–37, Berlin, 1892.

structure analysis).

Two Anatolian rugs in a Damascus style:

362cm. Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul,

Bennett, Ian, ‘Splendours in the City of

Bennett, Ian, ‘A Carpet is a Picture of God.

Bode, Wilhelm, Vorderasiatische Knüpf-

Campana, P. Michele, European Carpets, Paul Hamlyn, London, 1969.

Cavallo, Adolph, ‘The Splendour Falls on

no.A-107. Formerly: Ulu Mosque, Divrigi.

The Alexander Collection: Part II’, in

teppiche aus Älterer Zeit, Seemann,

Castle Walls’, in Museum of Fine

Published: Vakıflar Museum 1998,

HALI 74, pp.86–95, April/May 1994.

Leipzig, 1901.

Arts, Boston, Bulletin, vol.LX, no.321,

pp.124–31, 296–7, pl.60 (with structure analysis). (2) The Divrigi leaf lattice rug.

150 x 290cm. Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul, no.A-134. Formerly: Ulu Mosque, Divrigi.

Published: Vakıflar Museum 1998,

Bennett, Ian (ed.), Rugs and Carpets of the

Bode, Wilhelm von, and Ernst Kühnel,

World, Greenwich Editions, London,

Vorderasiatische Knüpfteppiche aus

2004.

Älterer Zeit, 2nd edition, Leipzig,

Berlin, Museum für Islamische Kunst, Islamische Kunst, exhibition cata-

1914.

Bode, Wilhelm von and Ernst Kühnel,

pp.63–82, Boston, 1962.

Collins, Sheridan Pressey, ‘The Spanish Connection’, in HALI, 38, pp.42–4, 1988.

Curatola, Giovanni, Tappeti, Milan, 1981.

pp.124–31, 298–9, pl.61 (with structure

logue, 1967, Staaliche Museen Preus-

Vorderasiatische Knüpfteppiche aus

analysis).

sischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, 1967.

Älterer Zeit, 3rd edition, Klinkhardt &

in Oriental Carpet & Textile Studies II:

Biermann, Leipzig, 1922.

Carpets of the Mediterranean

Berlin, Museum für Islamische Kunst,

Curatola, Giovanni, ‘Four Carpets in Venice’,

HALI ISSUE 157 91

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Countries 1400–1600, pp.123–30,

Rugs’, in Textile Museum Journal,

Oriental Carpets, Faber and Faber,

edited by Robert Pinner and Walter

vol.I, no.4, pp.5–22, Washington DC,

London, 1970.

B. Denny, HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

December 1969.

Curatola, Giovanni, ‘Il commercio dei tap-

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Is the Mamluk

Erdmann, Kurt, Oriental Carpets, An Account of their History, translated

peti a Firenze nell’Ottocento: appunti

Carpet a Mandala?’, in Textile

by Charles Grant Ellis, Zwemmer,

sugli antiquari Bardini’, in La Cono-

Museum Journal, vol.IV, no.1,

London, 1975.

scenza dell’Asia e dell’Africa in Italia nei Secoli XVIII e XIX, vol.III, t.I, pp.248–60, Naples, 1989.

pp.30–50, Washington DC, 1974.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Carpet Collections of the Philadelphia Museum of Art’,

Eskenazi, John, L’Arte del Tappeto

pp.29–44, Washington DC, 1978.

catalogue, Essen, 1961.

Carpet Design’, in HALI, 48, pp.38–45, December 1989.

De Unger, Edmund, ‘Connoisseurs

Spanish Rugs’, in Good Furniture

Textile Museum, Washington DC, 17

Magazine, vol.XXVIII, pp.7–12,

March to 26 June 1981, in HALI, 4/1,

1927(1).

pp.67–8, 1981.

Choice: The Silk Mamluk’, in HALI,

the Textile Museum’s Oriental Carpet

31, pp.8–9, 1986.

Collection’, in Textile Museum Journal,

Denny, Walter B., ‘Ten Great Carpets’, review of the exhibition of the same

Faraday, Cornelia Bateman, ‘Early

ition’, review of an exhibition at The

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘The Strengths of

24, pp.61–73, 1985.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘On “Holbein” and

Faraday, Cornelia Bateman, ‘Spanish Rugs of the XVI and XVII Centuries’, in Good Furniture Magazine, vol.XXVIII, pp.87–92, 1927(2).

Faraday, Cornelia Bateman, European and American Carpets and Rugs, Dean-Hicks Co., Grand Rapids, 1929.

title at the Boston Museum of Fine

“Lotto” Rugs’, in Oriental Carpet and

Art, Autumn, 1977, in HALI, 1/2,

Textile Studies, Volume II, Carpets of

pp.156–64, 1978.

the Mediterranean Countries

and American Carpets and Rugs,

1400–1600, pp.163–87, edited by

Antique Collectors’ Club, Wood-

Denny, Walter B., ‘The Origin of the Designs of Ottoman Court Carpets’,

Robert Pinner and Walter B. Denny,

in HALI, II/1, pp.6–11, Spring 1979.

HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

Denny, Walter B., ‘Türkmen Carpets and

Enderlein, Volkmar, ‘Zwei Ägyptische

Faraday, Cornelia Bateman, European

bridge, 1990.

Farnham, Thomas J., ‘Bardini, Classical Carpets, and America’, in HALI, 119, pp.74–85, November–December 2001.

Early Rug Weaving in the Western

Gebetsteppiche im Islamischen

Islamic World’, in HALI, 4, 2,

Museum’, in Forschungen und

pp.329–37, 1982.

Berichte, Staatliche Museen zu

History’, in Ghereh, no.12, pp.7–19,

Berlin, vol.XIII, pp.7–15, 1971.

1997.

Denny, Walter B., ‘The Origin and Development of Ottoman Court

Enderlein, Volkmar, ‘Zwei Kleinasiatische

Felton, Anton, ‘Jewish Carpets, A Brief

Ferrandis Torres, José, ‘Alfombras hispano-

Carpets’, in Oriental Carpet and

Teppiche mit Rankenmusterung’, in

moriscas “tipo Holbein”’, in Archivo

Textile Studies, II, Carpets of the

Forschungen und Berichte, Staatliche

Espanol de Arte, L, pp.103–11,

Mediterranean Countries 1400–1600,

Museen zu Berlin, Band 19, 1979.

March–April 1942.

chapter 20, pp.243–59, HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

Denny, Walter B., ‘Oriental Carpets and

Enderlein, Volkmar, Wegleitung Islam-

exhibition catalogue, edited by V.B.

zu Berlin, 1988.

Mann, Mondadori, Milano, 1990.

Enderlein, Volkmar, ‘Bode’s Legacy:

Islamic World, 828–1797, exhibition

Wilhelm von Bode & The Berlin

catalogue, 27 March to 8 July 2007,

Carpet Collection’, in HALI, 69,

edited by Stefano Carboni, pp.174–91,

pp.84–95, June–July 1993.

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

Ferrara, Italya, Arte ebraica in Italia,

isches Museum, Staatliche Museen

Textiles in Venice’, in Venice and the

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Some Observations on

Mushtaqah fi Isbarya [The Islamic in Majallat al Tari Khiyat al Misriyah,

terranean Lands’, in The Dictionary of pp.472–4, London, 1996.

38, pp.32–41, March/April 1988.

Gamal, Mehrez, ‘As syad al Islami wa Carpet and its Derivations in Spain]’,

ägyptische Kunst, exhibition

Day, Susan, ‘“Chinoiserie” in Islamic

Vakıflar Carpet Collection’, in HALI,

Essen, Villa Hügel, 5000 Jähre

in Textile Museum Journal, vol.17, Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Mamluk Rug Exhib-

Pinner, ICOC, Danville, 1999.

Franses, Michael, and Ian Bennett, ‘The

Orientale, Milan, 1983.

Curatola, Giovanni, ‘Islamic Art, (b) MediArt, edited by Jane Turner, vol.16,

Murray L. Eiland, Jr., and Robert

Field, D.M., Les Plus Beaux Tapis du Monde, Geneva, 1983.

Florence, The Carpet Studio, The Carpet

XI, pp.182–93, Societé Egyptienne D’Etudes Historiques, 1963.

Gans-Reuden, Erwin, Iranian Carpets, Art, Craft and History, Office du Livre, Fribourg, 1978.

Gantzhorn, Volkmar, The Christian Oriental Carpet, Bendikt Taschen, Cologne, 1991.

Geijer, Agnes, ‘Some Thoughts on the Problems of Early Oriental Carpets’, in Ars Orientalis V, 1963.

Gilles, Roland, and Michael Franses, ‘Constellations in the Heavenly Firmament’, in HALI, 138, pp.89–93, January–February 2005.

Glück, Heinrich, and Ernst Diez, Die Kunst des Islam, Propyläen Kunstgeschichte, vol.5, Berlin, 1925.

Goodenough, E., Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period, New York, 1960.

Grube, Ernst, ‘Infinity Made Visible’, in HALI, 108, pp.82–9, January/February 2000.

Gutmann, J. (ed.), Beauty in Holiness: Studies on Jewish Customs and Ceremonial Art, New York, 1970.

HALI, The International Magazine of Antique Carpet and Textile Art/Carpet Textile and Islamic Art, London, from 1978.

Hamburg, Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe, Orientalische Teppiche aus Vier Jahrhunderten, exhibition cata-

Studio di Alberto Boralevi, exhibition

logue, 22 August to 22 October 1950,

catalogue, October to November

text by Kurt Erdmann, Hamburg, 1950.

York, and Yale University Press, New

the So-Called “Damascus Rugs”’, in

1996, text by Maurizio Cohen and

Haven, 2007.

Art in America, vol.XIX, pp.3–22, 1930.

Alberto Boralevi, Il Tappeto Parlante,

aus Ägypten, seine Ornamente und

Rome, 1996.

Perspektive’, in Alte und Moderne

Denny, Walter, and David Black, ‘Mamluk

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Kairener Teppiche I.

and Ottoman Carpets’, in The Atlas of

Europäische und Islamische Quellen

Rugs and Carpets, London, 1994.

des 15. bis 18. Jahrhunderts’, in Ars

Dimand, Maurice, ‘Two Fifteenth Century Hispano-Moresque Rugs’, in Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin,

Islamica, vol.V, pp.179–206, 1938(1).

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Kairener Teppiche II. Mamluken- und Osmanenteppiche’, in

Florence, Fortezza da Basso, Oriental Geometries, Stefano Bardini and the Antique Carpet, exhibition catalogue, edited by Alberto Boralevi, Sillabe, Livorno, 1999.

Hein, Wilhelm, ‘Der Seidene Sternteppich

Kunst, XXII, 151, pp.14–21, 1977.

Heinz, Dora, Alte Orientteppiche, Wohnkunst und Hausrat/Einst und Jetzt, vol.24, Darmstadt, 1956.

Heinz, Dora, ‘Die Sammlung Oriental-

vol.22, no 10, pp.341–52, June 1964.

Ars Islamica, vol.VII, pp.55–81, 1940.

Florence, Pitti Palace, Islam, Specchio

ische Teppiche im Österreichischen

Edinburgh, National Museums of Scotland,

Erdmann, Kurt, Der Orientalische Knüpf-

d’Oriente, exhibition catalogue, 23

Museum für Angewandte Kunst in

Beyond the Palace Walls, Islamic Art from the State Hermitage Museum,

teppich, Tübingen, 1955.

Erdmann, Kurt, review of ‘Arazzi e Tappeti

exhibition catalogue, 14 July to 5

Antichi. Mercedes e Vittorio Viale...

November 2006, edited by Mikhail B.

Rezension’, in Ars Orientalis, II,

Piotrovsky and Anton D. Pritula,

pp.571–89, 1957.

NMS, Edinburgh, 2006.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘A Soumak Woven

Erdmann, Kurt, Oriental Carpets, New York and London, 1960.

April to 1 September 2002, edited by G. Damiani and M. Scalini, Livorno, 2002.

Foster, Olive Bumstead, ‘Rug Society

Wien’, in Bustan, 3, pp.41–8, 1962.

Hoskins, Nancy Arthur, ‘Textiles’, in Fustat Finds, Beads, Coins, Medical Instruments, Textiles and Other Arte-

News: A History of the Hajji Baba

facts from the Awad Collection,

Club’, in HALI, 2/1, pp.54–8, 1979.

American University in Cairo Press,

Franses, Michael, ‘Fengruan Rutan, Silk

Cairo and New York, 2002.

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Neuere Untersuchungen

Pile Covers from Western China’, in

Style’, in Textile Museum Journal,

zur Frage der Kairener Teppiche’, in

First Under Heaven, The Art of Asia,

North Africa’, in Oriental Carpet and

vol.1, no.2, Washington DC, 1963.

Ars Orientalis, vol.4, pp.65–105, 1961.

HALI Annual 4, pp.84–107, Hali

Textile Studies, Volume II, Carpets of

Publications, 1997.

the Mediterranean Countries 1400–

Rug in a 15th Century International

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Mysteries of the Misplaced Mamluks’, in Textile Museum Journal, vol.2, no.2, Washington DC, 1967.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘The Ottoman Prayer

92 HALI ISSUE 157

Erdmann, Kurt, Europa und der Orientteppich, Florian Kupferberg, Mainz, 1962.

Erdmann, Kurt, Siebenhundert Jahre Orientteppiche, Herford, 1966.

Erdmann, Kurt, Seven Hundred Years of

Franses, Michael, ‘Some Wool Pile Persian-Design Niche Rugs’, in

Housego, Jenny, ‘“Mamluk” Carpets and

1600, pp.221–42, HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

Oriental Carpet and Textile Studies,

Hubel, Reinhard, The Book of Carpets,

vol.V, part 2, pp.36–136, edited by

Barrie & Jenkins, London, 1971.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS ICOC, Programme of the 5th International

muster nach Bildern und Originalen

Martin, Fredrik R., The History of Oriental

Conference on Oriental Carpets,

des XV.-XVI. Jahrhunderts, Wasmuth,

Carpets before 1800, Printing Office

Vienna and Budapest, 17 to 21

Berlin, 1877.

of the Imperial Austrian Court,

September 1986.

Isaacson, Richard, ‘Mamlukes, Ottomans and All That’, in Oriental Rug Review, vol.12, no.1, pp.42–5, October/November 1991.

Isaacson, Richard, ‘The Admiral & The Wild Man’, in HALI, 98, pp.78–83, 1998.

Istanbul, Sakip Sabanci Museum, Ottoman Splendour in Florentine Collect-

Li Wenying, ‘Treasures from Xinjiang, Two Carpets from New Excavations’, in Ghereh, no.29, pp.7–15, 2002.

Li Wenying, ‘Textile of the Second to Fifth Century Unearthed from Yingpan Cemetery’, in Riggisberger Berichte, 9, pp.243–64, 2006.

Lisbon, Museu Nacional de Arte Antigua, The Oriental Carpet in Portugal, Carpets and Paintings, 15th–18th

Vienna, 1908.

May, Florence Lewis, ‘Hispano-Moresque

und Textilkunst, Band 5, exhibition catalogue, text by Eberhart Herrmann, Herrmann, Munich, 1997.

Munich, Staatlichen Museums für Völkerkunde, Old Eastern Carpets,

Rugs’, in Notes Hispanic V, The

Masterpieces in German Private

Hispanic Society of America, New

Collections/Alte Orientteppiche,

York, 1945.

Ausgewähte Stücke deutscher

Mayer, Leo, Saracenic Heraldry, Oxford, 1933.

Mazzini, Ferdinando, Tappeti Orientali, Tirrenna, Livorno, 1952.

Mellaart, James, Çatal Hüyük, A Neolithic

Privatsammlungen, catalogue of an exhibition, 23 March to 12 May, text

by Martin Volkmann et al., Callwey, Munich, 1985.

- Munich, Stadt-Museum, Exposition of

ions, From the Medicis to the Savoias,

Centuries, exhibition catalogue, 31

Town in Anatolia, Thames and Hudson,

Mussulman Art, exhibition catalogue,

exhibition catalogue, 21 December

July to 18 November 2007, curated

1967.

text by Drs Sarre and Martin, Bruck-

2003 to 21 March 2004, Sakip

by Teresa Pacheco Pereira and

Sabanci Museum, Istanbul, 2003.

Jessica Hallett, MNAA, Lisbon, 2007.

Mellaart, James, Udo Hirsch, and Belkis Balpinar, The Goddess from Anatolia, Eskenazi, Milan, 1989.

mann, Munich, 1910.

Munich, Stadt-Museum, Ausstellung von Meisterwerken Muhammedanischer

Istanbul, Sakip Sabanci Museum, In

Little, Donald, ‘The Haram Documents as

Praise of God, Anatolian Rugs in

Sources for the Arts and Architecture

Transylvanian Churches 1500–1750,

of the Mamluk Period’, in Muqarnas,

Handbook of Mohammedan Art, text

catalogue, edited by Friedrich Sarre

exhibition catalogue, 19 April to 19

2, pp.61–72, 1984.

by Maurice Dimand, Metropolitan

and F.R. Martin, with contributions

Museum of Art, New York, 1958.

from M. van Berchem, M. Dreger,

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,

E. Kühnel, C. List and S. Schröder,

Century Jerusalem’, in Oriental

Oriental Rugs in the Metropolitan

[carpet section entries by Friedrich

Oriental Carpets, Weaving Heritage

Carpet and Textile Studies, Volume II,

Museum of Art, text by Maurice

Sarre], F. Bruckmann A.G., Munich,

of Anatolia, catalogue of exhibtions

Carpets of the Mediterranean

Dimand and Jean Mailey, Metro-

1912.

August 2007, Sakip Sabanci Museum, Istanbul, 2007(1).

Istanbul, International Conference on

Little, Donald, ‘Data from the Haram Documents on Rugs in Late 14th

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,

for the 11th ICOC, 19 to 22 April

Countries 1400– 1600, pp.83–94,

politan Museum of Art, New York,

2007, edited by Hülya Tezcan and

edited by Robert Pinner and Wlater

1973.

Sumiyo Okumura, 2 vols,, ICOC,

B. Denny. HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

Istanbul, 2007(2).

Keir Collection, Ham, Islamic Carpets and Textiles in the Keir Collection,

Little, Donald, ‘In Search of Mamluk Carpets’, in HALI, 101, pp.68–9, November 1998.

Migeon, Gaston, Manuel d’Art Musulman, vol. 2, Arts Plastiques et Industriels, Paris, 1927.

Milan, Eskenazi Gallery, Il Tappeto Orien-

Kunst in München 1910, exhibition

Murray, Thomas, ‘In Pursuit of a Prototype’, in HALI, 112, pp.89–91, September–October 2000.

Museo Nacional de Artes Decorativas, Madrid, Alfombras Españolas del Museo Nacional de Artes Decorativas,

tale dal XV al XVII secolo, exhibition

text by Alberto Bartolomé Arraiza,

Carpet in the Western World, exhib-

catalogue, 21 January to 20 February

Cristina Partearroyo and Ana Schoebel

ition catalogue, 20 May to 10 July

1982, text by Michael Franses and

Orbea, Thyssen-Bornemisza Found-

of a London Temple, edited by A.G.

1983, text by Donald King, with

Ian Bennett, Eskenazi, Milan, 1981.

Grimwade, London, 1951.

essays by John Mills and David

Milan, Galleria Moshe Tabibnia, Tappeti

text by Friedrich Spuhler, Faber and Faber, London, 1978.

Kendrick, A.F., and R. Barnett, in Treasures

Kendrick, A.F., and C.E.C. Tattersall, Hand-Woven Carpets, Oriental and European, 2 vols., Benn Brothers, London, 1922.

King, Donald, ‘[East Mediterranean Carpets in the Victoria & Albert Museum]

London, Hayward Gallery, The Eastern

ation, Madrid, 1996.

Museo Nacional de Artes Decorativas,

Sylvester, Arts Council of Great

Classici d’Oriente del XVI e XVII

Britain, London, 1983.

Secolo, exhibition catalogue, 21

Alcaraz y Cuenca, Siglos XV–XVI, text

September to 20 November 1999,

by Alberto Bartolomé Arraiza, Museo

Art Fair, fair handbook, 2002.

Moshe Tabibnia, Milan, 1999.

Nacional de Artes Decorativas, Madrid,

Mackie, Louise W., ‘Two Remarkable

Milan, Galleria Moshe Tabibnia, Mile-

Maastricht, MECC, The European Fine

Fifteenth Century Carpets from

stones in the History of Carpets,

Madrid, Alfombras Españolas de

2002.

Museum für Angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

The History of the Collection’, in

Spain’, in Textile Museum Journal,

exhibition catalogue, 14 October to

Altorientalische Teppiche, exhibition

HALI, 4/1, pp.36–7, 1981.

vol.IV, no. 4, pp.15–27, 1977.

11 November 2006, text by Jon

catalogue, text by Siegfried Troll,

King, Donald, ‘The Carpet Collection of

Mackie, Louise W., ‘Native and Foreign

Thompson, Moshe Tabibnia, Milan, 2006.

Vienna, 1951.

Museum für Angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

Cardinal Wolsey’, in Oriental Carpet &

Influences in Carpets Woven in Spain

Textile Studies, I, pp.41–54,

during the 15th Century’, in HALI,

Milanese, Enza, Tappeti, Milan, 1992.

Die Orientalischen Knüpfteppiche im

HALI/OCTS, London, 1985.

II/2, pp.88–95, Summer 1979.

Milanese, Enza, The Carpet. An Illus-

MAK, text by Angela Völker, MAK,

King, Monique, ‘French Documents

Mackie, Louise, ‘Woven Status: Mamluk

Relating to Oriental Carpets,

Silks and Carpets’, in The Muslim

15th–16th Century’, in Oriental

World, vol.LXXIII, nos 3–4, pp.253–61,

Carpet and Textile Studies, Volume II,

July/October 1983.

Carpets of the Mediterranean Count-

Mackie, Louise W., and Jon Thompson

trated Guide to the Rugs and Kilims of the World, London, 1999.

Mills, John, ‘Eastern Mediterranean Carpets in Western Paintings’, in HALI, 4/1, pp.53–5, 1981.

Mills, John, ‘Carpets in Paintings. The

ries 1400– 1600, pp.131–8, edited by

(eds.), Turkmen, Tribal Carpets and

Robert Pinner and Walter B. Denny.

Traditions, Textile Museum, Washing-

“Bellini”, “Keyhole”, or “Re-Entrant”

HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

ton DC, 1980.

Rugs’, in HALI, 58, pp.86–103,

Kühnel, Ernst, ‘Die Entwicklung des

Madrid, Sociedad Española de Amigos

August 1991.

Mills, John, ‘The Chihil Sutun “Para-

Orient-Teppichs’, in Die Kunstwelt, III,

del Arte, Exposición de Alfombras

pp.441–60, 1913/14.

Antiguas Españolas, exhibition cata-

Mamluk” Prayer Rug’, in HALI, 93,

logue, May to June 1933, text by

pp.72–6, July 1997.

Lamm, Carl Johann, ‘The Marby Rug and Some Fragments of Carpets Found in

José Ferrandis Torres, Sociedad

Egypt’, in Svenska Orientsällskapets,

Española de Amigos del Arte,

Årsbok 1937, pp.51–130, Bokförlags

Madrid, 1933.

Aktiebolaget Thule, Stockholm, 1937.

Landsberger, Franz, ‘Old-Time Torah Curtains’, in Hebrew Union College Annual, XIX, 1945–6, p.368, fig.4.

Lessing, Julius, Alt Orientalische Teppich-

Mallary, DeWitt, ‘Assaults on the Noble Mind’, in HALI, 128, pp.105–7, May–June 2003.

Maréchal, Andrea, ‘The Riddle of Çatal Hüyük’, in HALI, 26, pp.6–11, 1985.

Mills, John, ‘Portugal and the Oriental Carpet’, in HALI, 154, pp.133–4, 2007.

Mitteilungen des Gesellschaft zur Erforschung Jüdisches Kunstdenkmäler, I, Frankfurt, 1900.

Moustapha, Mohamed, Le Musée de l’Art Arabe au Caire, Cairo, 1949.

Munich, Herrmann, Asiatische Teppich-

Vienna, 2001.

Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin, Katalog 1971, Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, 1971.

Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin, Katalog 1979, Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, 1979.

Museum für Kunst und Industrie, Vienna, Führer durch das Österreichische Museum für Kunst und Industrie, edited by Richard Ernst, et al., Vienna, 1929.

Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin, Oriental Carpets in the Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin, text by Friedrich Spuhler, Faber and Faber, London, 1988.

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, In Pursuit of Excellence.

Works of Art from the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, Ahmet

HALI ISSUE 157 93

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Ertug, Istanbul, 1993.

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, Anatolian Carpets, Masterpieces from the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, text by Nazan Ölçer

Gallimard, Paris, 2006.

Petzel, Florence Eloise, Textiles of Ancient Mesopotamia, Persia and Egypt, Florence Petzel, USA, 1987.

Philadelphia Museum of Art, Oriental

München 1910’, in Kunst und Kunsthandwerk, XIII, pp.469–86, 1910.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Orientalischen Teppiche aus dem ehemaligen Wiener Hofbesitz’, in Der Kunstwanderer, pp.444–7, 1920.

Syria under Sultan Qaitbay’, in HALI, 134, pp.94–105, May–June 2004.

Taylor, Roderick, ‘Spanish Rugs at Vizcaya’, in HALI, 52, pp.100–7, August 1990.

Textile Museum, Washington DC, Cata-

and Walter B. Denny, 2 vols, Ertug

Carpets in the Philadelphia Museum

and Kocabiyik, Bern, 1999.

of Art, text by Charles Grant Ellis,

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Ägyptische Herkunft

University of Pennsylvania Press,

der Sogennanten Damakus-Teppiche’,

raisonné vol.2, text by Ernst Kühnel,

Philadelphia, 1988.

in Zeitschrift für Bildende Kunst,

technical analysis by Louisa Bellinger,

vol.XXXII, pp.75ff., 1921.

National Publishing Company, Wash-

Neugebauer, Rudolf, and Julius Orendi, Handbuch der Orientalische Teppichkunde, Hiersmanns Handbucher, vol.IV, Hiersmann, Leipzig, 1923.

Neugebauer, Rudolf, and Siegfried Troll, Handbuch der Orientalischen Teppichkunde, Hiersmann, Leipzig, 1930.

[Pinner, Robert], ‘The Saracenic carpets of France’, in HALI, 1/2, pp.208–9, 1978.

Pinner, Robert, ‘Introduction’, in Oriental Carpet & Textile Studies II, Carpets of

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Ägyptischen Teppiche’, in Jahrbuch des Asiatischen Kunst, vol.I, pp.19–25, 1924.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘A Fourteenth-Century

logue of Spanish Rugs, 12th to 19th Century, Textile Museum catalogue

ington DC, 1953.

Textile Museum, Washington DC, Cairene Rugs and Others Technically Related, Textile Museum catalogue raisonné,

the Mediterranean Countries 1400-

Spanish Synagogue Carpet’, in Bur-

text by Ernst Kühnel, technical analysis

Catalogue of a Loan Exhibition of

1600, pp.1–11, edited by Robert

lington Magazine, LVI, pp.89–95, 1930.

by Louisa Bellinger, National Publishing

Early Oriental Rugs, exhibition cata-

Pinner and Walter B. Denny.

logue, 1 November 1910 to 15 Jan-

HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art,

uary 1911, text by Wilhelm Valentiner, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1910.

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art,

Pinner, Robert, and Michael Franses, Turkoman Studies 1, Oguz Press, London, 1980.

Pinner, Robert, and Michael Franses, ‘The

The James F. Ballard Collection of

East Mediterranean Carpet Collection

Oriental Rugs, exhibition catalogue, 1

[in the Victoria & Albert Museum]’, in

October to 31 December 1923, text

HALI, 4/1, pp.37–52, 1981.

Pordenone, Convent of Saint Francis, De

Sarre, Friedrich, and Hermann Trenkwald, Old Oriental Carpets, Leipzig, 1926–29.

Schlosser, Ignace, The Book of Rugs,

Company, Washington DC, 1957.

Theologou, Julia, ‘Fustat Carpet Fragments’, in HALI, 156, pp.65–71, 2008.

Thompson, Jon, ‘Medallion Carpets, Their

Oriental and European, Bonanza, New

Elusive Origin’, in The Sarre Mamluk

York, 1963.

and 12 other Classical Rugs, pp.8–15,

Schuette, Marie, Perser-Teppiche, Leipzig, 1935.

Schürmann, Ulrich, Bilderbuch für Tep-

auction catalogue, Lefevre, London, 23 May 1980.

Thompson, Jon, Milestones in the History

pichsammler, with a foreword by Kurt

of Carpets, published on the occasion

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

Mirabilibus Mundi, Viaggio nel Mondo

Erdmann, Kunst und Technik Verlags,

of the exhibition of the same name at

York, 1923.

del tappeto Orientale, exhibition cata-

Munich, [1960].

Galleria Moshe Tabibnia, Milan, 14

by Joseph Breck and Frances Morris,

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art,

logue, 1 December 2007 to 27 Jan-

Al-Andalus, The Art of Islamic Spain,

uary 2008, text by Carlo Scaramuzza,

exhibition catalogue, 1 July to 27

esaExpomostre, Pordenone, 2007.

September 1992, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1992.

Prato, Museo del Tessuto, Intrecci Mediterranei, exhibition catalogue, 5 May

Scott, Philippa, The Book of Silk, Thames and Hudson, London, 1993.

Serjeant, R.B., Islamic Textiles, Material

October to 11 November 2006, Moshe Tabibnia, Milan, 2006.

Thomson, W.G., ‘Hispano-Moresque Car-

for a History up to the Mongol Con-

pets’, in Burlington Magazine, vol.XVIII,

quest, Beirut, 1972.

no.92, pp.100–11, London, 1910.

to 30 September 2006, text by Giam-

Sherrill, Sarah B., ‘The Islamic Tradition in

Museum für angewandte Kunst Wien,

piero Nigro, Marco Spallanzani, Anna

Spanish Rug Weaving: Twelfth through

Vienna, 1995.

Contadini, Alberto Boralevi, et al.,

Seventeenth Centuries’, in The

Museo del Tessuto Edizioni, Prato,

Magazine Antiques, vol.105, no.3,

The Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,

2006.

pp.532–49, March 1974.

Carpets and Textiles, text by Friedrich

Noever, Peter, MAK. Österreichisches

Norris, Nancy, ‘Fostat Seminar’, in HALI, 34, p.54, 1987.

Okumura, Sumiyo, The Influence of Turkic Culture on Mamluk Carpets, Research Centre for Islamic History, Art and Culture, Istanbul, 2007. Ölçer, Nazan, et al., Turkish Carpets from the 13th–18th Centuries, published in conjunction with an exhibition of the

Réal, Daniel, Tissus Espagnols et Portugais, Libraire des Arts Décoratifs, Paris, [1925].

Reichel, Herbert, Berühmte Orient-

Sherrill, Sarah B., Carpets and Rugs of Europe and America, Abbeville Press, New York, 1996.

Spallanzani, Marco, Oriental Rugs in

Teppiche aus historischer Sicht,

Renaissance Florence, Bruschettini

Reichel, Rheinberg, 1969.

Foundation for Islamic and Asian Art,

Riefstahl, Rudolf Meyer, ‘Das Palmeten-

Thomson, W.G., ‘Spanish Carpets’, in Apollo, II, pp.229–35, 1925.

Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, Lugano,

Spuhler, Philip Wilson, London, 1998.

Tolomeo, U., Il Tappeto Orientale, Novara, 1979.

Torres Balbás, L., in Ars Hispaniae, vol.IV, Madrid, 1942.

Troll, Siegfried, ‘Die Wiener Sammlung

Textile Studies I, SPES, Florence 2007.

orientalischer Teppiche’, in Zeitschrift

Spallanzani, Marco, ‘Carpets at the Medici

für bildende Kunst, LXIII, p. 247–56,

same name held at the Museum of

motiv auf einem Ägyptischen Teppich

Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, 26

der Ballerd-Sammlung’, in Jahrbuch

Court in the Second Half of the Six-

September to 12 November 1996,

des Asiatischen Kunst, vol.II, pp.159–

teenth Century’, in Bruschettini Foun-

62, 1925.

dation for Islamic and Asian Art,

aus Kaiserlichem Besitz’, in Jahrbuch

Islamic Art, [i.p.].

des Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen,

Ahmet Ertug, Istanbul, 1996.

Pagnano, Gigi, L’Arte del Tappeto Orientale

Riegl, Alois, ‘Die Ausstellung oriental-

ed Europeo, dalle origini al XVIII

ischer Teppiche im K.K. Österr.

secolo, Bramante Editrice, Busto

Handelsmuseum’, in Mitteilungen des

Stockholm, National Museum, Carpet Fragments, The Marby Rug and Some

1930.

Troll, Siegfried, ‘Ein Orientalischer Teppich

Sonderheft 112, Vienna, 1937(1).

Troll, Siegfried, ‘Damaskus-Teppiche,

K.K. Österreichischen Museums für

Fragments of Carpets Found in Egypt,

Probleme der Teppichforschung’, in

Kunst und Industrie, 2 parts, N.F. VI.

exhibition catalogue, text by Carl

Ars Islamica, vol.IV, pp.201–31,

Islamica a Venezia’, in Ghereh, 1/2,

Jahrgang, no.66, pp.383–91, no.67,

Johann Lamm, Nationalmuseums

pp.67–73, 1993.

pp.405–14, Vienna, 1891.

skriftserie NS 7, Stockholm, 1985.

Arsizio, 1983.

Papotti, Luisa, ‘Eredità dell’Islam, Arte

Paris, Institut du Monde Arabe, Tapis,

Riegl, Alois, ‘Altere orientalische Teppiche’,

Stone, Peter, The Oriental Rug Lexicon,

1937(2).

Turkish and Islamic Arts Museum, Istanbul, Anatolian Carpets, Masterpieces

Present de L’Orient a l’Occident,

in Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen

exhibition catalogue, text by Roland

Sammlungen des Allerhochasten

Gilles, et al., Institut du Monde Arabe,

Kaiserhauses, vol.XIII, pp.311–13, 1892.

Kromerízi – neznámá perla textilního

Walter B. Denny, 2 vols, Ertug and

Sánchez Ferrer, José, Alfombras Antiguas

umení v ceskych sbírkách’, in Mater-

Kocabiyik, Bern, 1999.

Paris, 1989.

Paris, Institut du Monde Arabe, Heaven in a Carpet, exhibition catalogue, 7 December 2004 to 27 March 2005,

ialie, Studie, pp.413–17, 2006.

Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul, Carpets of the Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul, text by

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Mittelalterliche KnüpftepHerkunft’, in Kunst und Kunsthand-

94 HALI ISSUE 157

Islamic Arts, text by Nazan Ölçer and

Suriano, Carlo Maria, ‘Talking Rugs’, in

Monde Arabe, Paris, 2004.

3 October 2006 to 18 February 2007,

from the Museum of Turkish and

de la Provincia de Albacete, Instituto de

piche kleinasiatischer und spanischer

l'Orient 828–1797, exhibition catalogue,

Stulc, Josef, ‘Mamlúcky koberec v

Estudios Albacetenses, Albacete, 1986.

text by Roland Gilles, et al., Institut du Paris, Institut du Monde Arabe, Venise et

London, 1997.

werk, vol.X, pp.503ff., Vienna, 1907.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Teppiche auf der Mohammedanischen Ausstellung in

Ghereh, no.10, p.55, December 1996.

Suriano, Carlo Maria, ‘Mamluk Blazon Carpets’, in HALI, 97, pp.72–81, March 1998.

Suriano, Carlo Maria, ‘A Mamluk Landscape, Carpet Weaving in Egypt and

Belkıs Balpinar and Udo Hirsch, Wesel, 1988.

Venice, Palazzo Ducale, Arabeschi, exhibition catalogue, 19 July to 31 October 1991, edited by Giovanni Curatola, Marsilio, Venice, 1991.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Venice, Palazzo Ducale, Eredità dell’IslamArte Islamica in Italia, exhibition catalogue, organised by the Comune di Venezia, 30 October 1993 to 30 April

26 June 1981, arranged by Patricia Fiske, The Textile Museum, Washington DC, 1981.

Washington DC, The Textile Museum, The

1994, edited by Giovanni Curatola,

Classical Tradition in Anatolian Carpets,

Silvana Editoriale, Milan, 1993.

exhibition catalogue, 13 September

Venice, Palazzo Ducale, Venezia e l'Islam 828–1797, exhibition catalogue, 28 July to 25 November 2007, edited by

2002 to 16 February 2003, text by Walter B. Denny and Sumru Belger Krody, Scala, London, 2002.

Stefano Carboni, Marsilio, Venice, 2007.

Washington DC, A World of Oriental Car-

Viale, Mercedes, and Vittorio Viale, Arazzi

pets and Textiles, exhibition catalogue,

e Tappeti Antichi, Novara, 1969.

17 to 21 April 2003, for the Xth Inter-

Victoria and Albert Museum, London,

national Conference on Oriental Car-

Guide to the Collection of Carpets, text by A.F. Kendrick, Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 1915.

Victoria and Albert Museum, London,

pets, edited by Murray L. Eiland Jr., ICOC, Washington DC, 2003.

Wearden, Jennifer, ‘Europe’, in World Rugs and Carpets, edited by David

Guide to the Collection of Carpets,

Black, pp.204–21, Country Life Books,

text by A.F. Kendrick, Victoria and

London, 1985.

Albert Museum, London, 1920.

Victoria and Albert Museum, London, Fine Carpets in the Victoria & Albert Museum, text by A.F. Kendrick and C.E.C. Tattersall, E. Benn, London, 1924.

Victoria and Albert Museum, London, Guide to the Collection of Carpets, text by C.E.C. Tattersall, Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 1931.

Vienna, Orientalische Teppiche, introduct-

Weeks, Jeanne G., and Donald Treganowan, Rugs and Carpets of Europe and the Western World, Chilton Book Co, London, 1969.

Whiting, Mark, ‘The Red Dyes of Some East Mediterranean Carpets’, in HALI, 4/1, p. 55, 1981.

Wilckens, Leonie von, ‘Oriental Carpets in the German Speaking Countries and the Netherlands’, in Oriental Car-

ion by A. von Scala, text by J.M. Stöc-

pet and Textile Studies II. Carpets of

kel, et al., 2 vols, Österreichischen

the `Mediterranean Countries 1400-

Handels-Museum, Vienna, 1892.

1600, pp.139–50, edited by Robert

Vienna, Österreichisches Museum für Kunst und Industrie, Ausstellung Orientalischer Teppiche aus ehemals Kaiserlichem Besitz, exhibition catalogue, text by H. Trenkwald, Vienna, 1920.

Völker, Angela, ‘Überlegungen zur Neuaufstellung der Orientteppich-sammlung des Österreichischen Museums für angewandte Kunst in Wien’ in HALI, 2/1, pp.12–15, Spring 1979.

Washington DC, Textile Museum, Weaving Through Spanish History, 13th– 17th Centuries, exhibition handsheet, 22 October 1972 to 24 March 1973, text by Louise Mackie, Textile Museum, Washington DC, 1972.

Washington DC, The Textile Museum, The

Pinner and Walter B. Denny. HALI/ OCTS, London 1986.

Wilkinson, James, ‘Scientific Dating’, in High Life, British Airways in-flight magazine, pp.60–4, November, 1987.

Wilckens, Leonie von, ‘The Quedlinburg Carpet’, in HALI, 65, pp.96–105, October 1992.

Woolley, Linda, ‘Hispanic Synthesis’, in HALI, 81, pp.66–75, June/July 1995.

Yaniv, B., ‘The Origin of the “Two-Column Motif” in European Parokhot’, in Jewish Art, vol.15, pp.26–43, Center for Jewish Art, Jerusalem, 1989.

Yetkin, Serare, Historical Turkish Carpets, Istanbul, 1981.

Zick, Johanna, ‘Eine Gruppe von Gebetsteppichen und ihre Datierung’, in

Splendor of Turkish Weaving, exhibition

Berliner Museen, Berichte aus der

catalogue, 9 November 1973 to 24

ehem. Preussiuscher Kunstsamm-

March 1974, text by Louise Mackie, The Textile Museum, Washington DC, 1973.

Washington DC, The Textile Museum, Prayer Rugs, exhibition catalogue, 21 September to 28 December 1974, text by Richard Ettinghausen, Maurice

lung, Jg. 11, pp.6–14, Berlin, 1961(1).

Zick, Johanna, Die Berliner Kunstsammungen und unser Bild von der islamischen Kunstentwicklung, Berlin, 1961(2).

Zick, Johanna, ‘Koptische Musterelem-

Dimand, Louise Mackie and Charles

ente und mamlukische Knüpfteppiche’,

Grant Ellis, The Textile Museum,

in Jahrbuch der hamburger Kunst-

Washington DC, 1974.

Washington DC, The Textile Museum,

sammlungen, vol.VII, pp.93ff., 1962.

Zick-Nissen, Johanna, ‘Das Wolkenband-

From the Far West: Carpets and Tex-

motiv als Kompositionselement auf

iles of Morocco, exhibition catalogue,

osmanischen Teppichen’, in Berliner

1980, edited by Patricia Fiske, Russell

Museen, Berichte aus den Preuss-

Pickering and Ralph Yohe, The Textile

ischen Kunstsammlungen, Berlin, 1966.

Museum, Washington, DC, 1980.

Washington DC, The Textile Museum, Mamluk Rug Exhibition, 17 March to

Zipper, Kurt, Orientteppiche. Vom Ursprung bis zur Gegenwart, Keysers SammlerBibliothek, Munich, 1982.

HALI ISSUE 157 95