".
Hali 63 (June 1992).
European Paintings and Designs
This chapter is aimed at highlighting the resemblances between what has been shown in European paintings and designs found in Iranian miniatures, touching briefly upon a few specimens pertaining to the subject. So far, the carpets reflected in the works of European painters have been judged to be definitely of Anatolian origin. The judgment has been as successful as Gantzhorn's attempt to ascribe them to Armenia.1 By that approach, anyone else can run a comparison between them and the designs in 14th-century miniatures and conclude that
Due to the proximity of Europe with Anatolia, some of those carpets may have been from that territory, as they could have been from Caucasus or Arran. No systematic study of the features other than the weave and the patterns (as discussed earlier in this book) has been carried out on those carpets to resolve the question of their origin.
It is important to note that the two features mentioned are widely noticeable in s produced in the west (especially in the north-west) of Iran. At the International Conference on Oriental s (ICOC) held in Hamburg in 1993, a 15th-century carpet was on display with Turkish knots and a design of the type discussed above, but while experts thought that it belonged to the north-west of Iran - Azarbaijan, to be exact - the carpet had been found in Tibet.2 The point is that such works of art belonged to a single cultural domain which, pursuant to the colonial moves for the division of the western part of Asia, is now known under the names of several countries. Iran has been the core of that cultural domain.
In a famous painting by Hans Holbein (Figure 63), there is a carpet which has prompted a lot Of debate. It has a Kufic border surrounding a partitioned (multi-medallion) field. Figure 64 shows a 16th-century painting by Lorenzo Lotto with the same type of border. Figure 65 is a painting by Evaristo Bascnis with a kind of inscription border. Both latter carpets have a field design that has been common across the north-west of Iran from Azerbaijan to Asia Minor as evidenced by its many extant specimens. Figure 66 shows a carpet with Turkish knot found in
1. Gantzhorn, Volkmar. The Christian Oriental Carpet. k5ln: Benedikt Taschen, 1991.
2. Orient Stars, A Carpet Collection: E. Heinrich LondonlHannover: Krich-Heim and Hali Publications,
1993.
northern Egypt. With his Armenian and Christians bias, Gantzhorn holds that the carpet is a product of the Armenians of north Egypt.
Figure 67 shows a carpet painted by the 15th-century artist Domenico Ghirlandajo, with a dual border (a Kufic and an S-chain) embracing a double-medallion field. This is a design that may have been woven anywhere in Iran.
Even some pre-14th century Persian carpets with particularly simple designs have. shown up in Western paintings. The fact that such paintings usually belonged to the religious places of Europe is an indication that simple-patterned carpets were more favored by the church in the 13th and 14th centuries (Figures 68-70).
Presentation of The Designs
In this chapter, we will introduce Some designs of carpets on miniatures, trying to go from the simplest to the most complex.
In the chapter dealing with schools of paintings in Iran, it was pointed out that schools differed in their design; this is not a general rule, however. It may happen that a very/old design shows up on a recent painting. Obviously, when the subject happens to be a royal palace, the designs are more advanced, whereas in a modest environment even a rug fragment may be picturedl, regardless whether the painter is of the Timurid or Safavid schools.
The designs in this chapter, therefore, have been arranged in the order of their historic changes from the simple to the complex and from the geometrical to the curvilinear. It will be noted that in their simplest form, designs have a simple structure with little or no interconnections between separate elements. Later, both the elements and the structure become more complex with greatly increased interconnections. Such was the case with the Timurid (15th century) designs which were not too distant from the curvilinear. In fact, some curvilinear elements do appear in Timurid designs, gradually gaining dominance to form the curvilinear designs. For each design presented here, a short description is given together with the miniature it has been reconstructed from.
Some rare and uncommon designs have been excluded from our reconstructions. These are designs that contain figural (animal) motifs. Only one such design has been seen on a miniature (Figure 77). The rare appearance of such carpet designson miniatures is probably due to the restrictions of Sunnites and urbanites about visual
1. Carpets were sometimes fragmented to pieces to be given away as alms or charity. See: Hassouri, AIL "Two Halves of the Same Carpet." Papers, Presentations; 7th International Conference on Oriental Carpets. Hamburg: The National Organizing Committee of ICOC, 1996. p. 137-141. Also: Martin, F. R. The Miniature Painting and Painters of Persian, India, Turkey from The 8th to The 18th Century. London: Bernard Quariteh, 1912. Vol. 2. pI. 71.
arts. Not a single animal figure is to be found on Turkman carpets of up to 50 years ago. Persian pictorial carpets used to be produced in places away from
the main centers - usually in villages. The modern outlook is of-course different.
As our discussion is mainly focused on pattern and design evolution from the simple to the complex, we do not differentiate between the designs on miniatures and those on European paintings. On the other hand, miniature specimens of certain Iranian designs such as the triple-medallion and the double-medallion are too few. One example is the design in Figure 76 which, incidentally, carries the sketch of an animal. In the Demotte copy of Shiihniimeh, there is a miniature showing Zahhak the Miirdush (snake-shouldered) sitting on the throne with a carpet spread under his feet. This copy was compiled in Bagdad over the years 1330-1336. As seen in Figure 77, the design is double-medallion with an S-chain border. Inside one medallion there is a dragon-like figure. The other borders of the carpet are also very attractive, with two of the outer ones (the first and second) now forgotten.
Another ~ery old specimen of multi-medallion designs is a miniature about A1exander~eath in the same copy of Shiihniimeh (Figure 9). A carpet is spread in the forefront with a field design comprising elements shown in Figure 10. This is one of the most expressive paintings of its period. The carpet, the bed, the coffin, the curtains, the lights, the chandeliers, the pendants, the apparel, and even the acts of mourning (such as shedding head scarfs, pulling hairs off, garment ripping, breast beating) all are very real. The design, therefore, must be considered as one very common early in the 14th century.
Figures 78-81 are Briggs's recons~ructions of designs from Timurid miniatures. But his work is not without shortcomings, as was noted, due to his lack of attention to the evolution of carpet design in Timurid era (Figure 3).
Briggs, Amy. "Timurid Carpets". Ars Islamica. Vo!. VII (1940).
Gantzhorn, Volkmar. The Christian Oriental Carpet, Benedikt Taschen, 1991.
'Gray, B. Persian Painting. Skira 1961. Gulasci, Zuzsanna. "The Hand of Mani, Felt Rugs in Manichaean Miniatures". Hali 75
(June/July 1994).
Lessing, Julius. Altorientalische Teppich Muster nach Bildern und Originalen des XV
XV I J ahr-hunderts.
Martin, F. R. The Miniature Painting and Painters of Persia. India. Turkey from The 8th to The 18th Century, London: Bernard Quariteh, 1912. Vo!. 11.
Martin, F. R. The Mmiature and Painters of Persia. India and Turkey from The 8th to
The 18th century, Vo!. I, London: Bernard Quariteh, 1912.
Mc Mullan, Joseph V. Islamic Carpets. New York: Near Easter Art Research
Center,1965.
Pope, Arthur Up ham. A Survey of Persian Art. Vo!. VI.
Pope, Arthur Upham. A Survey of Persian Art. Vo!. X.
Robinson, B. W. "A Survey of Persian Painting". Art et Societe dans le Monde Iranien.
Paris: 1989.
Robinson, B. W. A Descriptive Catalogue of the Persian Paintings in the Bodleian Library. Oxford: 1958. Nos 18,45, 72 and 76.
Schroeder, E. "Ahmad MuSII and Shams-ai-Din: A Review of Fourteenth Contury
Painting". Ars Islamica Vol. VI (1939)
Sredneaziatskie Miniature XVI-XVI IlBB. Vstupitelnara Stat'ya N. V. D'yakonovoi.
Moskva: Nauk. 1964.
Welch, S.C. "Two Shahs, Some Miniatures and the Boston Carpet". Boston Museum
Bulletin, No. 69 (1971).
Wertime, John. "Three Silk Jajims; A Case Study of an Irano-Caucasian Silk Product". http://www.almascarpet.com
