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

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 69

WITH THEIR EXTRAORDINARY BEAUTY, the product ofstriking juxtapositions of shimmering colour and complex butcarefully balanced designs, over the past century the classicalcarpets of Spain, Egypt and Syria have been studied in greatdepth and avidly sought after by museums and private collectorsalike.1

The Spanish and East Mediterranean carpets acquired by theNational Council for Culture, Arts & Heritage (now the QatarMuseums Authority) represent a substantial holding, given thatmany of the earliest examples still extant – the most beautifuland those in the finest condition – were already in Europeanand American museums by 1930. In the latter part of the 20thcentury the MIAQ has nevertheless been able to purchase ahandful of wonderful pre-1600 carpets and fragments in goodoriginal pile with glowing colours that had remained in privatehands, as well as other examples at auction. We should considerthis small group as a nucleus to be built upon.

The pan-Mediterranean textile trade, including carpets, datesback to antiquity, but a strong local style can be seen in the fewsurviving Spanish carpets from the 14th and early 15th centuries.Egyptian carpets from the second half of the 15th century andbefore also show relatively little outside inf luence.

The 15th century was a time of conquest and a period ofexpansion in trade in the Mediterranean region. By the early16th century, f loral Ottoman court designs, taken from textilesand ceramics made in western Anatolia, were beginning toinf luence carpet making in both Spain and Islamic NorthAfrica. In Spain such designs, in tandem with the stylisticinspiration of Spanish woven silk patterns, came to dominatecarpet making, and they were also inf luential in Egypt. Carpetdesign in Syria, however, then still part of the Mamluk Empire,took on a so-called ‘international’ style, drawing on inf luencesfrom Egypt, eastern Anatolia and Iran, that was to continue intothe 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 fortrade. The Spanish Inquisition and the expulsion of Spain’s Jewsand 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 beingexported to France and Italy, and during the 15th and 16th Italybecame the principal importer of carpets from Anatolia andEgypt. Many of the oldest surviving Syrian carpets can also be

To date, the National Council for Culture, Arts & Heritage of the Emirate of Qatarhas acquired five historical Spanish carpets and eight from Egypt and Syria for thenew Museum of Islamic Art in Doha. It is these that are the focus of the second inour series of in-depth surveys of the MIAQ collection. An unabridged version, withadditional images and extensive notes, appears on www.hali.com.

of

amuseum

2: IBERIAN & EAST MEDITERRANEAN CARPETSIN THE MUSEUM OF ISLAMIC ART, DOHA

masterpiecesMICHAEL FRANSES

1 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, CA24.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 69

WITH THEIR EXTRAORDINARY BEAUTY, the product ofstriking juxtapositions of shimmering colour and complex butcarefully balanced designs, over the past century the classicalcarpets of Spain, Egypt and Syria have been studied in greatdepth and avidly sought after by museums and private collectorsalike.1



The 15th century was a time of conquest and a period ofexpansion in trade in the Mediterranean region. By the early16th century, f loral Ottoman court designs, taken from textilesand ceramics made in western Anatolia, were beginning toinf luence carpet making in both Spain and Islamic NorthAfrica. In Spain such designs, in tandem with the stylisticinspiration of Spanish woven silk patterns, came to dominatecarpet making, and they were also inf luential in Egypt. Carpetdesign in Syria, however, then still part of the Mamluk Empire,took on a so-called ‘international’ style, drawing on inf luencesfrom Egypt, eastern Anatolia and Iran, that was to continue intothe 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 fortrade. The Spanish Inquisition and the expulsion of Spain’s Jewsand 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 beingexported to France and Italy, and during the 15th and 16th Italybecame the principal importer of carpets from Anatolia andEgypt. Many of the oldest surviving Syrian carpets can also be

To date, the National Council for Culture, Arts & Heritage of the Emirate of Qatarhas acquired five historical Spanish carpets and eight from Egypt and Syria for thenew Museum of Islamic Art in Doha. It is these that are the focus of the second inour series of in-depth surveys of the MIAQ collection. An unabridged version, withadditional images and extensive notes, appears on www.hali.com.

of

amuseum



1 The Convent of

Santa Ursula large

octagon carpet

(lower part), Spain,


2.50m (3'5" x 8'2"),

Museum of Islamic

Art, Qatar, CA24.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 69

WITH THEIR EXTRAORDINARY BEAUTY, the product ofstriking juxtapositions of shimmering colour and complex butcarefully balanced designs, over the past century the classicalcarpets of Spain, Egypt and Syria have been studied in great depthand avidly sought after by museums and private collectors alike.1



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

expansion in trade in the Mediterranean region. By the early16th century, f loral Ottoman court designs, taken from textilesand ceramics made in western Anatolia, were beginning toinf luence carpet making in both Spain and Islamic North Africa.In Spain such designs, in tandem with the stylistic inspiration ofSpanish complex woven silk patterns, came to dominate carpetmaking, and they were also inf luential in Egypt. Carpet designin Syria, however, then still part of the Mamluk Empire, took ona so-called ‘international’ style, drawing on inf luences fromEgypt, eastern Anatolia and Iran, that was to continue in useinto 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 fortrade. The Spanish Inquisition and the expulsion of Spain’s Jewsand 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 beingexported to France and Italy, and during the 15th and 16th Italybecame the principal importer of carpets from Anatolia andEgypt. Many of the oldest surviving Syrian carpets can also betraced back to Renaissance Italy.

To date, the National Council for Culture, Arts & Heritage of the Emirate of Qatar hasacquired five historical Spanish carpets and eight from Egypt and Syria for the newMuseum of Islamic Art in Doha. It is these that are the focus of the second in our seriesof in-depth surveys of the MIAQ collection. An abridged version of this article, withoutreferences or citations, appears in HALI 157, Autumn 2008.

of

amuseum



1 The Convent of

Santa Ursula large

octagon carpet

(detail), Spain, 15th

century. Museum of

Islamic Art, Qatar,

no.CA24.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

SPANISH CARPETSSpanish carpets have been collected by some of the most sophis-ticated of connoisseurs,2 often acquired through specialist dealersin Spain, Italy, Germany, England and America.3 My research arch -ive contains images of at least 260 knotted-pile carpets made inSpain before 1750, including fragments. Most examples are nowin museum collections.4

The MIAQ has five knotted-pile Spanish carpets, one perhapsfrom 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 looped-pile carpets from Alpujarra, nor any of the rare knotted-pile ormore common embroidered Arrialos carpets from Portugal.5 Thistiny group obviously cannot properly represent the history ofcarpet-making in the Iberian Peninsula, but it does offer a glim -pse of the carpet art of the region. To appreciate its significanceand merit, and to comprehend the rarity and importance ofSpan ish carpet-making in general, we should brief ly considerthe surviving corpus.

Most early Spanish carpets are made using a single warp withoffset knotting, a technique that may have come to Spain fromEgypt between the 8th and 10th centuries. A few pile carpet frag -ments 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 incombination with other techniques on some knotted-pile car petsfrom the 1st century AD found in Central Asia.7 R.B. Serjeanttells us of Arabic documents that mention carpet-making inSpain from the 10th century, although they do not say how rugswere constructed, and give little descriptive information.8 The‘Spanish’ technique was also being used in central Europe by the12th century, as can be seen from the large fragments of carpetsin 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 tendto be easily worn, often torn, and are now mostly fragmented.Cutting and patching occurred quite early on, as can be seen intwo 15th century rugs depicted in 16th century European paint -ings.10 Today different parts of one carpet may be found in anumber of different collections, and what seem to be completecarpets may have patches from one or more other examples.11

Spanish carpets were exported to many parts of Europe, andit is said that Eleanor of Castile introduced them to England in1255.12 A carpet, probably Spanish, is depicted in a fresco fromthe first half of the 14th century in the Palace of the Popes inAvignon.13 Its field of rows of conjoined small octagons separ atedby diamonds, each octagon containing a single six-pointed star,resembles a number of surviving Spanish ‘Admiral’ carpets attri -buted to the late 14th and 15th centuries. Monique King reportsthat: “The property of Pope Clement V (reigned 1305–14) atAvignon included 54 pile carpets, and Pope John XXII is said tohave had Spanish carpets with coats-of-arms in his apart ments atAvignon. The Bishop of Langres owned a pile carpet of Spanishmanufacture in 1395. The Duke of Berry had no fewer than 13Spanish carpets, mostly white grounds… mostly 2.40 metreswide and 8.50 metres long.”14 Ferrandis Torres also lists manySpanish inventories that mention carpets from the 14th to 18thcenturies in his important 1933 Madrid exhibition catalogue,Alfombras Antiguas Espanolas.15

The earliest almost complete Spanish carpet to survive, usuallyatt ributed to the 14th century, is in the Museum of Islamic Artin Berlin, acquired by Wilhelm Bode in Munich in 1884. Muchhas been written about it, and it has been convincingly sugges tedthat it was ordered for a synagogue.16

Historical records exist of carpet making from the 12th cen -tury onward in Chinchilla, Cuenca, and Murcia, and from the15th century in Letur, Liétor, Alcaraz, Salamanca and Granada.17

They tell us that Alcaraz was where Spanish rugs were sold, andthat 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 Muslimweavers who stayed on after the Inquisition and into the secondhalf of the 16th century. Today the labels ‘Alcaraz’ and ‘Cuenca’are the most widely used, the former for finer 15th and 16thcentury examples, the latter for coarser late 16th to mid-18thcentury carpets. All the so-called ‘Alcaraz’ carpets seem to beremarkably similar in wool, handle, weave and dyes.

For classification purposes, I have divided Spanish carpets intogroups representing basic field compositions rather than work -shops or places of manufacture. The same can be done with borderpatterns, which can be seen associated with several differentfield designs.18

Among the oldest of surviving Spanish carpets, perhaps madefrom the late 14th or early 15th century until the early 16th, arethose with field patterns composed of a small polygonal lattice.19

At least 27 examples are known to survive.20 They are commonlyknown as the ‘Admiral’ carpets, because the fields of some exam - ples are overlaid with large escutcheons containing the coats-of-arms of the 15th century ‘Admirals’ of Spain.21 Inventories fromthe 14th century onward cite Spanish carpets bearing blazons.22

Several of these lattice-field carpets are up to nine metres inlength and no more than 2.5 metres wide. Their fields are sur -rounded by between three and seven borders, including onecom posed of highly stylised Kufic script. On some carpets thiskufesque border is filled with various creatures, trees and humanfigures, including women in low-cut European-style dresses, andat least two examples have a pictorial panel depicting trees andanimals at each end.23 Similar geometric lattice borders and pic -torial end panels are also seen on Spanish carpets with ‘Turkish’field designs.24

Armorial blazons also appear on Spanish carpets with a num -ber of different field designs throughout the 16th, 17th and 18thcenturies. Four examples, believed to be funeral carpets, have acentral medallion with blazon and small medallions with skullsset against a textile pattern. At least nine others have blazons,some on a plain field, some with a decorated back ground. Span -ish coats-of-arms often appear on carpets with imported fielddesigns: two have border and spandrel designs taken directly fromearly 17th century west Anatolian originals, another copies asmall Ushak rug with a cloudband border, and at least four havefield designs taken directly from Anatolian arab esque or ‘Lotto’design rugs.

‘TURKISH-STYLE’ SPANISH CARPETSTurkish carpet designs, in particular those from western Ana tolia,inf luenced Spanish carpets most of all. The oldest survivingSpanish carpets with Turkish designs are attributed to the secondor third quarters of the 15th century, but examples must havereached Spain by the 13th or 14th, as many Spanish ‘copies’present an earlier version of Turkish designs than any survivingAnatolian rug.25

A Spanish carpet in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, has a‘small-pattern Holbein’ field of rows of small interlaced medal -lions, commonly found on west Anatolian rugs from the 15thand 16th centuries. The primary medallions have perfect inter -laced surrounds, the internal octagon within each octagon hasan interlaced pattern, and the green-ground field is enclosed by a wide border of ‘Kufic’ motifs separated by large interlacedknots.26 A carpet with different small interlaced medallions is in the Textile Museum, Washington DC. Another example,surviv ing as four fragments, has a tile- or ceiling-like fieldcomposed of a rectangular interlaced grid, each compartment of which is filled with a large interlaced medallion; the coloursand border pattern suggests that this probably dates from thelate 15th or early 16th century.27

One of the most widely published of all 15th century Spanishcarpets is in the Victoria & Albert Museum, London. With threeper fec tly balanced columns of ten small octagons of the type

70 HALI ISSUE 157

2 The Convent of

Santa Ursula large

octagon carpet

(lower part) Spain,


2.50m (3'5" x 8'2"),

Museum of Islamic

Art, Qatar, no.CA24.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 71

found on 15th and 16th century Anatolian carpets, it has anintense red colour and is in perfect condition.28

Twenty Spanish carpets have a Turkish field compositioncon sis ting of of large octagons, usually known as the ‘large-pattern Holbein design’ that appears on Anatolian and Syrianrugs dep ic ted in a number of 15th and 16th century paintings byvarious artists, including Hans Holbein.29 Most of these carpetshave a single large octagon placed in the centre of a large squareor rectangular compartment or panel that is then repeatedvertic ally, and often horizontally as well.

Carpets with this pattern can be further sub-divided accord -ing to the octagon design. The first sub-group comprises six car - pets, all possibly from the second half of the 15th century, with acomplex star medallion like that seen on an Anatolian rug dep -icted in 1486 by the Venetian artist Carlo Crivelli.30 The second, ofwhich two carpets survive (one split between two collect ions),both prob ably early 16th century, has an interlaced medallion.The third sub-group of large-octagon rugs, in which we find thesecond ary field ornament from the ‘small-pattern Holbein’ inter - laced carpets at the centre of each octagon, is represented by asingle surviving example, divided between three collections. Thefourth sub-group, consist ing of one complete carpet and onesmall frag ment, has a field design of vertical and horizontalrows of octa gons in implied compartments with small second -ary motifs between.

There are at least nine carpets (one divided between twocol lections) in the fifth and final sub-group, which have ‘wheel’-like medal lions placed in the centre of each square shaped com -part ment. The type dates from the second half of the 15th cent uryand an example can be seen depicted in a painting from around1530.31

The MIAQ owns a most beautiful example of this last sub-groupof Span ish ‘Holbein’ carpets, with three large octagons 1, 2. Thissub stantial section is the lower part of the ori ginal long carpet;the upper part, with four octagons, is in the Textile Museum,Wash ington DC.32 There is no firm indication that the carpetwas ever wider, but it could have been up to three columns inwidth. Reportedly acquired from the Convent of Santa Ursula inGuadala jara, north east of Madrid, both sections were once inVenice with the famous antique dealer Adolf Loewi. This lowersection passed through Benadava in Paris and thence to the WherCollection before coming to Doha.

At both ends of the field we see an extra ivory-ground panelwith a procession of ‘lions’, each in a different colour, but per -haps most interesting feature of the Spanish version of this pat -tern is that the central eight-pointed star is interlaced, creatingthe ill usion that the wheel is rotating. Once part of the originaldesign concept, this refinement is seen in very few survivingAnatolian versions, yet it appears in all known Spanish ones.The ground of the square compartments surrounding each largeoctagon has a beautiful interlaced design, reminiscent of awoven textile, and the borders that divide the octagons and sur round the field are typically Spanish and have not beenfound in Anatolian examples.

Among the best known of all historical Anatolian carpet pat -terns is the so-called ‘arabesque’ or ‘Lotto’ design, which firstappears in a European painting in 1516 and continued in use inAna tolian weaving until the end of the 17th century.33 Almost all ofthe two hundred or so surviving Anatolian arabesque rugs havedeep red grounds with the pattern in bright yellow outlined inblack and det ails in blue and ivory, although a few have blue orbrown grounds, and the pattern is very occasionally worked inblue or ivory.

Over thirty Spanish carpets with the Turkish arabesque fielddesign 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 hasoxidized. The pattern is usually in blue and ivory. The mostcom mon border is a curled-leaf pattern.

Spanish lampas designs.36

The earliest of the carnation group is a fragmented carpet inMadrid, with a wide Kufic border, large interlaced knots, deepreds and strong colours. Other examples have softer tones (apartfrom the blue) and yellow grounds that were originally red. Ithas often been suggested that the oxidised red seen on manycarpets made from the early 16th century onwards marks thetime when Jews and Muslims left Spain; dyeing was traditionallya Jewish craft.

Some of the carnation carpets made from the early 16th cent -ury onwards include birds, and two have the elegant Renaissanceborder pattern seen on the Qatar arabesque carpet 3. Related tothe carnation rugs are a further 23 examples with single palm -ettes in a lattice. The f lowers and lattice are clearly European instyle, 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 knownwith medallion Ushak designs, and two with the so-called‘Smyrna’ or f loral Ushak design. At least one example copies aCairene Ottoman design, and three more have designs copiedfrom small Esfahan rugs, made in central Iran in the 16th andearly 17th cen turies. One of these has a cartouche border, pos -sibly derived from a ‘Damascus’ rug. Two early Spanish carpetssurvive that have a cloud pattern directly copied from a 14thcentury Mongol silk.37

CARPETS WITH SPANISH SILK DESIGNSMore than 150 Spanish carpets have designs derived from Span -ish woven silk textiles. The earliest of these have the strong redand Kufic borders with animals attributable to the 15th century.Four have a field pattern of lobed oval medallions either in alattice or in diagonal rows,38 and twelve have ascending palm -ettes within an interlaced lattice.39 The lattice types and f loralpatterns vary slightly and are used in different combinations.

Another lattice field design, which must have been popularfor some time, features compartments filled with a large ascen -ding side-view f lowers or palmettes. In 33 examples an ogivallattice is composed of two parallel stems. Six of these have thestrong colours dateable to the late 15th and early 16th century,but the majority are from the second and third quarters of the16th century. One of these, with a two-plane lattice with palm -ettes, probably from the mid- 16th century, is one of only twoknown Spanish classical carpets with silk pile.40

The other known Spanish silk carpet, a corner section withpart of the field and the major and minor borders, is in theMIAQ 4.41 It is one of seven examples known (the others arewoven in wool), with a design of palm ettes in a diamond-shaped 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 fromthe very beginning of the 16th century. The wide lattice is inyellow – possibly originally red but now oxidised – and thebackground is green. The palmettes are linked diagonally bystems that intersect the lattice; the primary border has ameandering stem with f lowers pointing alternately inward andoutward on a light blue ground.

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

‘WREATH’ CARPETSThe Anatolian design of rows of large octagons 2 must haveinspired 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

72 HALI ISSUE 157

The MIAQ has one Spanish arabesque carpet, with the designin brown on an ivory ground, surrounded by an elegant Renais -sance border of large leaves 3.34 Originally from a European privatecollection, it was acquired at auction in London in 1999. One ofthe finest examples extant, it was prob ably made in the first half ofthe 16th century,

The Anatolian arabesque pattern also inspired a new Spanishdesign of serrated leaves that form an oval lattice and concavediamonds. Seven examples are known. A further seven carpetsare known with a textile pattern of diagonal rows of large car n -a tions directly copied from Ottoman silk velvets made in Bursa.35

This pattern was developed further in Spain: four rugs includeadditional f lowers, in a marriage between Ottoman velvet and

3 The Qatar arab -

esque carpet. Spain,


5.49m (9'3" x 18'0").

MIAQ, no.TE26.

4 The Unger palm -

ettes in diamond-

shaped lattice silk

carpet fragment,

Spain, early 16th

century. 0.58 x

0.76m (1'10" x 2'6").

MIAQ, no. TE12.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 73

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

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 prob ablyreduced in size, is in the MIAQ 5. It was acquired at auction in Londonin 2007, having previously been on the art market in both Paris andNew York. The two others are in Berlin and Miami.43

On all other Spanish wreath carpets the columns and rows ofwreaths have no containing compartments; in some of the oldestexamples the secondary motif diagonally adjacent to the wreathsresembles the secondary motif on many Anatolian carpets. The MIAQhas one such fragment, with four wreaths and no borders 6. Once withYves Mikaeloff in Paris, it was acquired at auction in London in 1997.Another section of this car pet, also with four wreaths but with parts ofthe border attached, was on the New York market some twenty yearsago.44 A small number of examples have different variations of thewreath pattern.

The few publications to date on Spanish carpets have tended tofocus on specific collections. The most important and best of these is still Alfombras Antiguas Espanolas, the rare catalogue byFerrandis Torres for the 1933 Madrid exhibition, which brought togetherexamples from a number of sources. Substantial research has beenundertaken in European inventories for records of Spanish carpets, andsome work has been done to collate their depictions in Westernpaintings, but there has not, to date, been any attempt to compile acomplete catalogue of all surviving Spanish carpets, or to analysethem,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 & SYRIAThe MIAQ Collection includes eight knotted-pile carpets madein the East Mediterranean region in the 16th century. Six areattributable to Cairo and two to Damascus. Four of the Cairenerugs and one of the Damascus rugs (only a section of border ofthe other survives) are in the ‘Mamluk style’ with designs ofgeometric motifs and small f loral elements in a predominantlyred, green and blue palette. The other two carpets from Cairoare more colourful, in the more naturalistic Ottoman f loral style.

Knotted-pile carpets have probably been made in the Levantand Anatolia since the second millennium BC or before.46 Wool-pile f loor coverings were made in Egypt before 2000 BC,47

although in these earliest surviving Egyptian carpets the pile islooped around the warps, rather than being individually tiedand knotted. It is not known when the knotted-pile techniquewas first used in Egypt, but it may go back at to at least 500 BC.

The oldest, almost complete, knotted-pile carpet currentlyknown to have been found in Egypt has been carbon-14 dated to580–920 AD, although the materials suggest that it may havebeen made in Anatolia.48 Many tiny fragments of knotted-pilecarpets 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 Meso -potamia, Anatolia and Iberia.49 There are Arabic references to14th century carpets made in Cairo,50 but no actual examplessurvive that can be conclusively linked to this period.51 CarlJohann Lamm found two small fragments in Fustat that mayrepresent carpet weaving from the mid-15th century.52

5 The Paris

wreaths in com -

partments carpet.

Spain, 16th cent -

ury. Three comp -

lete com part -

ments 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

circu lar Mamluk

carpet (detail),

Cairo, Egypt, 16th

cent ury. MIAQ,

no.TE07

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 75

MAMLUK-STYLE CARPETSThe Mamluk Sultanate (1250-1517) was centred on Egypt, but alsoembraced parts of south and central Anatolia, including theMala taya region, all of present-day Syria west of the Euphrates,the entire eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean and the RedSea, as well as parts of present-day Jordan, Libya and Tunisia. Itsprincipal cities were Cairo and Damascus. The Mamluks are knownfor their beautiful glassware, extraordinary metalwork, intricatewood-carving and kaleidoscopic ‘silk-like’ carpets.

Carpets in the ‘Mamluk-style’ (I use this term because mostsur viving examples were probably made after the Ottomans over -threw the Mamluk Sultanate in 1517), stand very much on theirown among oriental rugs, with their unique blend of shimmer -ing 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 madein Cairo, having first been thus attributed by some of the earliestcarpet scholars.53 However, because their patterns do not stylis-tically sit comfortably with the other Mamluk court arts, formany years the traditional Cairo label was not accepted by allexperts, and some more recent writings have put forward alter -native, less convincing, places of origin.54

The survival of a small number of carpets bearing the blazonof the Mamluk Sultan Qait Bay strengthens the attribution of theseexamples (and many others) to Cairo,55 while the redis covery in1983 by Alberto Boralevi of a hitherto unknown Mamluk-stylecarpet in the Medici Pitti Palace in Florence helps to establishthe 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 usthat “…in 1545 Iacopo Capponi went to Alexandria with instruc -tions to buy various things for Duke Cosimo I de Medici, inc lud -ing an unspecified number of rugs to be made to order”, whichwere shipped to Livorno in 1547. Inventory records from the late14th to the late 17th century report carpets coming from Cairo.59

These must represent only a fraction of the Mamluk-style carpetsthat arrived in Italy, for there is little doubt that the vast majoritywere imported via this route.

My archive contains images of 136 Mamluk-style carpets madein Egypt during the 15th and 16th centuries, divisible into groupsby approximate age and by design detail.60 Arguably the oldestsurviving example is the Salvadori fragment in the Victoria &Albert Museum, London.61 Four carpets from the same periodbearing the blazon of Sultan Qait Bay (r.1468-1496) were almostcertainly made in Cairo in the second half of the 15th century.62

These five, along with others in various collections that wereprobably originally from larger carpets with three central medal -lions, represent the so-called ‘first-period’ of Mamluk carpetweaving, prior to 1500.63

A second group of nearly thirty Mamluk-style carpets, rugs andfragments can attributed to the first quarter of the 16th century.Another hundred or so were probably made during the secondand third quarters of the 16th century. Thereafter the Caireneworkshops that made the Mamluk-style carpets were engaged inmaking carpets in the new Ottoman style, using identical dyesand materials. At least eight carpets are known that rep resent atransitional group with elements of both styles.64 From the mid-14th century a parallel development was probably occurring inthe northern Mamluk capital of Damascus in Syria, where carpetdesign was being inf luenced by or inf luencing designs in Anatoliaand Iran.

Assigning carpets to particular periods is fairly arbitrary anddepends on a number of features. Pre-1500 Mamluk-style piecestend to have longer pile, natural-coloured warps, a looser con -struction and more colours than those of later periods. Carpetsfrom the first and second periods tend to have between five andseven colours, some have red-dyed warps, and they often have

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

76 HALI ISSUE 157

8. The Arhan Mamluk

carpet. Cairo, Egypt,


3.08m (8'3" x 10'1").

MIAQ,no. A22

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

the general composition of the Habsburg silk Mamluk carpet inVienna, a large central compartment surrounded by smaller,square ones, to the 15th-16th century mosaics on the f loor ofthe Mosque of Sultan Hassan in Cairo.73

The basic composition of the Mamluk carpets, based on acentralised motif surrounded by a symmetrical arrangement ofrectangular and square compartments, is probably derived frompavements and mosaic f loors of the Roman period. Similarcompositions can also be seen on Egyptian Coptic textiles fromthe 3rd to 9th centuries. The f loor is a ref lection of the heavensabove, and it is unsurprising that similar compositions appearon later Islamic ceiling patterns. Many Mamluk carpets have asingle central medallion, but there are more than thirty largeformat examples with either three or five medallions.74

Almost all Mamluk carpet patterns are designed to be viewedfrom all directions, perhaps because they were intended tomirror ceiling patterns. However, there are three Mamluk rugswith directional designs indicating that they were made to hangon a wall, in front of a cupboard, or as a doorway.75

The ornamentation of Mamluk carpets draws upon a widerange of artistic sources and has been of intense interest toscholars. Studying one of the Ballard Collection Mamluk rugs inSt Louis in 1925, Rudolf Riefstahl compared a motif composedof a palm tree f lanked by two cypresses, commonly found onlater Mamluk carpets, to Assyrian stone decoration from the 7thcentury BC.76

Some ornaments, such as the octagons, the interlace andvarious minor details, form part of an ‘international’ style seenon rugs from Spain to India. Other minor motifs are specific toCairene carpets and can be traced from medieval westernIslamic decoration back to Hellenistic art. Some, such as the‘umbrella’ and ‘lancet’ leaves, have been explained as aconscious return to Egyptian ornament. The designs on theearliest Mamluk carpets are extremely complex and well-proportioned, whereas later the patterns are simplified.

Although the patterns of Mamluk carpets are mostly com -posed of octagons, eight-pointed stars and compartments, otherdesigns were also used. Four surviving carpets have a two-leveldiamond lattice, each compartment containing a single f lower.77

Two of them have the traditional Mamluk border of a cartouchealternating with a lobed medallion, and two have a design oflarge tulips, which continued to be used on rugs with Ottomanfield designs. They were probably made in the second or thirdquarters of the 16th century, after the transition from Mamluk toOttoman styles had begun.

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

The Arhan Mamluk carpet 8, reportedly with the same Turk -ish family for over seventy years, was acquired by the MIAQ in1997.78 Probably made in the second quarter of the 16th century,it has just three colours, red, green and blue. The red (lac) hascorroded, while the blue (indigo) and green pile is quite high inplaces, giving a sculpted effect. The carpet had been folded formany years: along the fold lines are some tiny holes, probablycaused by moth and now skillfully restored.79 The drawing isremarkably good, and the serrated edge of the eight-pointed starmedallion is also found on some second period carpets. An extrapanel at each end of the field contains large circular medallionsalternating with groups of three trees: a palm f lanked by cypresses.A special feature, in the inner and outer minor borders, is thethree balls and wavy lines of the Ottoman çintamani symbol.

Four circular carpets from Cairo are known. Three of themhave Mamluk geometric designs: the Barbieri carpet in the Brus chettini Foundation, Genoa; the Olmutz carpet at KremsierCastle 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

bands of stylised Kufic script. Those from the third period gen -erally have just three colours, yellow-dyed warps and simplecartouche borders. A general simplification of pattern seems tohave occurred over time. Such differences probably representthe 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. JennyHousego has proposed a Maghrebi (northwest African) originfor all Mamluk car pets.66 Jon Thompson has tentatively sugges -ted that the ‘early’ examples were made in Cairo, as one wasfound there, but that the main corpus was made elsewhere,perhaps in Syria, close to the Mamluk Sultanate’s northernfrontier with Turkey, while also suggesting that the Maghrebipossibility 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 theother in Cairo.68 His argument refers to Charles Grant Ellis,69 whowrote that several of the earlier Mamluk carpets have distinctivetechnical differences from later ones, including multiple wefts,unusually long pile and abnormal colouring, although both groupsshare the technical features of S-spun wool and asym metricknot ting. Ellis attributes this small group to the Maghreb andthe main group to Cairo. Suriano’s desire to return the bulk ofMamluk carpets to Syria may have been inspired by Thompson’s1980 article, or by the many earlier and contemporaneous refer -ences to Syrian carpet making, or by the fact that S-spun woolwas found in Iraq, but his discus sion omits any reference to theevidence that the Medici Mamluk came from Cairo.

At least fifteen European paintings are known that depictidentifiable Mamluk-style carpets from Cairo,70 the earliestbeing Paris Bordone’s Fisherman Presenting St Mark’s Ring to theDoge, painted about 1540. Thompson shows that Bordone’scarpet, with a medallion set against a plain field, is similar tothe Bardini blazon carpet in Florence, which is attributed to theend of the 15th century.71 Bordone’s carpet may thus have beenfifty or more years old when he painted it. However, the Mamlukcarpets depicted in the famous Moretto frescos in Brescia belongto a later generation with simpler patterns, and may thereforehave been less than twenty years old when they were painted in1543. Mamluk-style carpets from Cairo continue to appear inEurop ean paintings through the 16th and early 17th centuries.

All carpets made in Cairo from the 15th to 17th centuriesshare a distinctive woven structure: the wool is mostly S-spunand Z-plied, the opposite of almost all other ‘oriental’ rugs ofwhatever 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 beundyed, with red-dyed wefts, although occasionally both warpsand wefts are red. On the vast majority of examples in the thirdgroup, the warps and wefts are dyed yellow or yellow-green, afeature that continued in use for later 16th and early 17th centuryOttoman-style rugs. The long-staple wool used for the warpsand pile is very glossy, resembling silk. A unique example knot -ted in silk on a silk foundation survives in the ÖsterreichischesMuseum für angewandte Kunst in Vienna.72

Earlier Mamluk-style carpets tend to be knotted with five orseven colours (red, green, blue, yellow, ivory, purple and brown),while later ones use as few as three (red, green and blue). As onIndian and Iranian carpets, the red is created from the insect dyelac, and is often corroded, while the blue is dyed with indigo,which tends to preserve the wool. On a rug that has seen littlewear, the blue areas are often higher than the red, giving anembossed effect. Lac appears to have been used less often onexamples from the second half of the 16th century, whichachieve 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 kaleidoscopicornamentation of Mamluk carpets is drawn from some of thebest of Islamic art and design. In 1924, Friedrich Sarre related

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

78 HALI ISSUE 157

Art in Washington has an Ottoman field design.81

There is good evidence that round carpets were made for royaland imperial tents in Iran, India and China, and there is everyreason to think that round Mamluk carpets were used the sameway in Egypt. When they arrived in Europe, such carpets wereused as table covers. The 1587 Medici archives in Florence mentiona circular ‘cairino’ carpet,82 and two ‘round Mamluks’ appear inthe 1596 Innsbruck inventory of Grand Duke Ferdinand II ofAustria,83 who received one as a gift from the Medici court.84

The round carpet in the MIAQ 7, 9 was probably made earlyin the second quarter of the 16th century. Its beauty lies in itsrich colours (red, blue, green and yellow) and its lustrous pile,having survived in pristine condition for almost five centuries.

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

The other two Mamluk-style carpets in the MIAQ collection, arather worn rug 10 and a small fragment from a large carpet 11, areboth study pieces, acquired at auction in London in 1996 and1998 respectively.85 The rug, with a medallion and bands of cyp -resses and palm trees, was formerly in the Bern heimer Collect -ion, Munich, while the fragment had appeared on the Londonmarket a number times since the early 1980s.

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

9 The Milan circular

Mamluk carpet,

Cairo, Egypt, 16th

century. 2.78 x

2.26m (9'1" x 7'1").

MIAQ, no.TE07

CAIRENE OTTOMAN CARPETSAlmost a hundred rugs and carpets with f loral designs survivefrom Cairene workshops. Scholars generally agree that the firstOttoman design rugs were made there. Ernst Kühnel tells us that“the connection with Mamluk rugs [is] undeniable, because ofthe similarity of the material... More important and even con -clu sive is the frequent mention of ‘Cairene’ rugs expressly calledin French, German, Italian, and Spanish inventories of theXVIth-XVIIth centuries. Their beauty is repeatedly emphasisedby comparison with the famous Persian carpets, and in someinstances they are classified as ‘Turkish rugs from Cairo’.”86

Despite this, some authors, including Kühnel, have conjec t -ured that certain Ottoman court rugs, especially the finest nicherugs and related examples with similar structure may have beenmade somewhere closer to the court, in either Bursa or Istanbul.This suggestion was occasioned by a single document whichrefers 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 TurkishSultan”, and that this factory was most probably located in Bursa.88

This attempt to establish that Bursa was a rug producing centrein the latter part of the 16th century is based on two further

documents, one of 1474, the second in 1525 (which mentions sixrug-makers and nine workmen).89 In fact, the confusion datesback to the early 20th century when F.R. Martin described theImperial Austrian Ottoman f loral field niche rug, without evid -ence, as being from unspecified “Ottoman Imperial manufac-tories in Asia Minor”.90 So when, in 1938, Erdmann publishedhis 1585 reference to the Egyptian weavers arriving in Turkey,the attribution was adopted – unquestioned – by almost everysubsequent carpet scholar.91

In 1981, after a number of Ottoman carpets had been phys ic -ally analysed and the ‘evidence’ reviewed, the proposed Turkishattribution was shown to be unsound. Examination of the twelveOttoman carpets in the Victoria & Albert Museum, London, as wellas a large number of other examples in European public and privatecollections led Robert Pinner and me to con clude that: “Thequestion, which of the known Ottoman f loral carpets wereproduced in Turkey seemed at one time to be ans wered by theidentification of two major groups: one, of relat ively coarsely-woven rugs with both the foundation and the pile in wool, andwith its structure and colour closely related to Mamluk carpets,and a second group of more finely woven carpets, with silk warpsand wefts, and with a pile consisting not only of wool but alsowhite, and sometimes blue, cotton. The attribution of the lattergroup to ‘Istanbul’ or ‘Bursa’ appeared to be sup por ted by the

10 The Bernheimer

Mamluk rug with

medallion and bands

of cypress and palm

trees. Cairo, Egypt,


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.

1980s, which establish that the red dye in Mamluk rugs wasmostly lac,96 while of the two Ottoman carpets he tested, thered of one was lac, the other cochineal, which “…allows thepossibility of using dye-analysis to separate the Ottoman carpetsinto an earlier and a later group, with, of course, the usualreservations about the length of the period during which bothdyes were used, and the uncertainty of the mid-point.”97

It is possible that some Cairene Ottoman design rugs pre-date afew Mamluk design rugs. The Medici carpet, con sidered on styl -istic grounds to be the latest known example of its type, frombetween 1557 and 1571, may suggest that Ottoman designs werebeing made in Cairo from at least the beginning of the thirdquarter of the 16th century, if not a little before. We may alsoassume that the earliest examples in the new Ottoman style werestill quite similar to Mamluk rugs.98 The very finely knottedsilk-foundation niche rugs with highly refined designs may wellhave begun to be made by the latter part of the 16th century.

There are two Cairene Ottoman carpets in the MIAQ collec tion.The finer of the two is a large carpet acquired at auction fromthe English country house Hackwood Park in 1998 11. It is veryfinely woven, with superb drawing and composition,99 but whilethe wefts and warps are almost all original, there is hardly anoriginal knot left on the carpet. The clarity of drawing and finearticulation of pattern strongly suggests that it pre-dates theMedici Ottoman carpet and can be ascribed to the beginning ofthe third quarter of the 16th century. Certainly the restorationfollowed the original pattern faithfully, so the Hackwood carpetremains a very good document of an Ottoman carpet pattern.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

fact that both the silk and the cotton were Z-spun in a non-Egyptian manner.92 The apparent contradic t ion, pres en ted bythe fact that the wool was mainly S-spun, i.e., as in Mamluk and‘Cairene’ Ottoman carpets, was exp lained by adherents of thistheory, by the suggestion that the pile wool was imported [intoTurkey] from Egypt.”93

Alberto Boralevi’s discovery of the two great Cairene carpetsof the Medici in the warehouses of the Pitti Palace is of inestim -able importance in this discussion. Of greater significance hereeven than the Medici Mamluk is the Ottoman carpet, also inexcel lent condition.94 Boralevi writes of it: “As stated in theinventory, the Ottoman carpet was brought as a gift to the GrandDuke 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 asCairene, supports the theory… according to which all thesecarpets were manufactured in the same Egyptian workshopsduring the Ottoman Empire.”

The 1623 inventory date of the Medici carpet provides the onlyreliable benchmark for dating Cairene Ottoman rugs. From itspresent-day appearance we may assume that it was new at thetime of acquisition, and we may further assume that the work -shops producing rugs of this type probably continued to do sothroughout the 17th century. However, stylistically the Medicicarpet marks the decline of the artistic tradition, and it is likelythat several of the finer Ottoman niche rugs pre-date it. There isalso some lim ited assistance to be drawn from tests of Mamlukand Ottoman carpet dyes performed by Mark Whiting in the

80 HALI ISSUE 157

12 The Hackwood

Park Cairene

Otto man 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,


1.91m (4'4" x 6'3").

MIAQ, no.CA63

14 The Muse East

Med iterranean

car touche-border

car pet (detail),

Damascus, Syria,

15th or 16th century.

MIAQ, no.TE14

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 81

The second Cairene Ottoman rug in the MIAQ 12, acquired atauction in London in 2004, was for merly in the Bernheimerfamily collection, having been acquired by Otto Bernheimer in1919.100 It belongs to a group of small-format rugs, several ofwhich have exactly the same colours and dimensions as some ofthe small Mamluk-style rugs, and represent a continuum fromthe same workshops. While the pattern is reasonably clear, thedrawing is not quite as refined as on the more finely knottedexamples. The round green medallion and green quarteredmedallions in the corners are typical. At each end of the fieldare small circular half-medallions. The f loral pattern in thebackground appears as a section from an endless repeat thatdisappears beneath the borders and medallions. The medallionsalso create the illusion of an infinite repeat design, a section ofwhich is framed by the borders. Other workshops in Cairoproduced small rugs, some very finely knotted with muchcrisper renderings of Ottoman f loral designs, in particular agroup of prayer rugs, several of which are on a silk foundation.

Both Cairene Ottoman carpets in Doha should be viewedprimarily as study pieces. However, there is every possibilitythat this area of the collection can be raised to the level of theMamluk examples in the foreseeable future.

MAMLUK-STYLE CARPETS FROM SYRIACarpets must have been made in present-day Syria, the Levantand the upper reaches of the fertile valleys of the Tigris andEuphrates Rivers since antiquity. The majority of the peopleinhabiting this region were semi-nomadic pastoralists, andwool-pile carpets must have been part of their daily furnishings.

Three thousand years ago the great cities of ancient Meso pot -amia had stone ‘carpets’, which perhaps ref lect the patterns onpile carpets that no longer survive. Five centuries later, the landbetween the Tigris and Euphrates and much of present-day Syriawas ruled by the Persians. Their great empire was then conqueredby the Greeks and later by the Romans, whose villas had mosaicf loors that were probably covered with carpets in winter.

Two thousand years ago, Syria was an important section ofthe ancient Silk Road that linked China to Greece and Rome.Knotted-pile carpets with Greek mosaic designs have been foundin Central Asia, and Chinese woven silks have been discoveredin Syria, demonstrating that textiles travelled across the entirebreadth of Asia, enabling new designs and ornaments from distantlands to be copied along the way. It is against this backgroundthat we should consider the origin of carpet designs in this region,some of which may derive from or ref lect the patterns of f loortiles and woven silks.

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

Our interest here lies in Syrian carpet design from the 15th to17th centuries, and in particular the early part of that period,under Egyptian rule. In 1250, the Mamluks defeated the AyyubidEmpire in Egypt, and in 1260 advanced along the East Mediter -ran ean coast to defeat the Mongol armies at Ayn Jalut, extendingthe Mamluk Sultanate to include Syria and southern Anatolia.They ruled this region for some 250 years until they were defeatedby the Ottoman Turks in 1516. It was the Mamluk style that mostpowerfully 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, weav -ing technique and colouration. The wool is generally Z-spun,while carpets made in Cairo tend to use S-spun wool. The pile isgenerally quite hairy, perhaps made of goat’s wool, and unlikeCairene carpets rarely has much sheen. The knot is for the mostpart asymmetric, in common with rugs from Cairo, central andeastern Iran, India and China. By contrast, Anatolian carpets tendto be symmetrically-knotted (this technique spreads beyond the

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

borders of present-day Turkey into the Caucasus and northwestPersia). The warps are generally ivory wool and are often quitehairy, again perhaps from goats. The 2-ply wefts, of similar wool,are generally dyed red. There are two weft shoots between eachrow of knots, the second pulled very tight so that the upperwarp almost almost covers the one beneath, producing a heavilydepressed foundation weave and a firm handle.

Very few Damascus carpets survive in good condition – mostare damaged and many exist simply as fragments. Although theyappear to be quite thick and sturdy, the method of constructionmakes them quite fragile. Fragmentation may be due to the factthat with their stiff handle they break when folded. In mostexamples as much as 10cm, sometimes more, is missing fromthe ends. This may be due to the fact that the original narrowkilim at each end was not adequately secured, so that the rowsof knots simply fell away.

Their predominant red, blue and green palette is very muchin the taste of Mamluk carpets from Egypt, although on Syriancarpets the red dyes are almost always madder, in common withAnatolian rugs. Thus in their colours and knotting Syrian carpetsresemble those of Egyptian, in their spinning and dyeing theyresemble Anatolian carpets, and in their patterns, they showinf luences from Anatolian, Egyptian and Iranian carpets.

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

82 HALI ISSUE 157

15 The Wher East

Mediterranean

com part ment rug,

Damascus, 16th

century. 1.30 x 1.75m

(4'3" x 5'9"). MIAQ,

no.CA44

century, Syrian or ‘Damascus’ rugs had arrived in Europe.102 Atleast one is depicted in a European tapestry from that time.103

John Mills has shown that the Damascus ‘compart ment’ designis first seen in an Italian painting before 1581, and lists sevenfurther occurrences in Italian, English and Dutch paintings up tothe 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 whenthey were depicted.

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

The ‘para-Mamluk’ carpets are the oldest surviving examplesattributable to the northern part of the Mamluk Empire, datingfrom the 14th to the early 16th century. The term was coined byCharles Grant Ellis and groups together at least fourteen carpetsand fragments with a number of common features.106 Most havesimilar compositions, colouration and minor ornaments, butthere is some technical variation: some are asymmetricallyknotted, some symmetric, and others a combination).

The oldest is the so-called ‘Domes and Squinches’ rug in theVakıf lar Museum, Istanbul, which has been labelled as early asthe 13th century, although it is more likely to have been made inthe 14th.107 It was found in the Great Mosque in DivriÌi alongwith another para-Mamluk with a simpler design, possibly fromthe 15th century. Both were probably made in east or southeastAnatolia, then part of the Mamluk Empire. Twelve other para-Mamluk rugs survive: three complete, some small fragments,some larger carpets and a unique prayer rug. These can be datedto the late 15th and early 16th century, as examples with relatedpatterns are depicted in at least a dozen European paintings.108 Ithas been suggested that these rugs, together with others fromSpain, western Anatolia, Syria, Iran and India, form part of an‘international’ carpet style that continued through the 14th tothe 16th century.109

There is continuing debate concerning the source of the para-Mamluks: some writers have attributed them to eastern Anatolia,others to Tabriz in northwest Iran. However, the limited avail -able evidence suggests that at least some were made in present-day Syria or southeastern Anatolia, as they form a continuumwith the vast majority of later rugs attributed to that area. JonThompson 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 thosedepicted in Iranian paintings of the Turkmen period, neither thefield patterns nor the palette fit comfortably into Turkmen art,appearing closer to the Mamluk style, whether from Egypt orsoutheastern Anatolia.111

The most common design on Damascus carpets is the above-mentioned ‘compartment’ pattern, many elements of which canbe seen in ‘para-Mamluk’ rugs. The field is covered with a gridof compartments formed on a red ground by four corner triangles,leaving an octagon within centred on an interlaced star with eightradial pairs of ‘cypresses’, an ornament shared with Mamlukrugs from Cairo. Secondary banded compartments are formed byvertical and horizontal cypress pairs, with a quar tered diamondformed by the four adjacent triangles at the centre. In the fullversion of this complex interlocking design, two other substratepatterns emerge: the diagonal pairs of cypresses form a diagonallattice, while the ends of the cypresses are drawn so as to createan impression of rows of circles within the compartments.112

These ‘compartment’ rugs tend to come in three sizes: largecarpets, smaller and small rugs. It is mostly the small rugs thathave 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 diagonallyare large blue diamonds divided through the centre, so that inpart they can be seen as quartered triangles, and the compart -

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 83

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

A number of border patterns are known for these rugs, ofwhich the one seen in the MIAQ rug is the most common. Fourleaves extend from large lobed medallions, with small cartouchesbetween. In Mamluk carpets the cartouche is generally consid-erably larger than the lobed medallion. The rug has much of itsoriginal pile and remarkably fresh colours. As with so manyDamascus rugs, parts of the end borders have been lost and havebeen replaced.

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

A deeper understanding of Syrian carpet design can be gainedfrom the patterns of the twelve known examples that have neither‘para-Mamluk’ nor ‘compartment’ designs, at least two of whichmight have been made in southeast Anatolia.113 The largest (some7.70m long) and most spectacular are two almost identi calmed allion carpets in the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Art(TIEM) in Istanbul. These have two onion-shaped medallionswith pen dants in dark blue with rumi split-leaves that form adiamond-shaped inner medallion. Second ary round medallionsalong the sides of the field are only partially visible, as they arecut off by the border. The medallion, reminiscent of Ushakcarpets, more likely draws its inspiration from Iranian patternsand Ottoman book covers. The field is surrounded by a cartoucheand medallion border, like so many Mamluk carpets, but with avery different pattern. Both carpets, although almost complete,are composed of many reassembled fragments.

A beautiful early Damascus carpet in the Museum of IslamicArt in Berlin, in outstanding condition, has a field entirely cov -ered with cloudbands, a pattern that originated in China andreached Syria via Iran. In Istanbul there is a very small single-niche fragment from a multiple-niche saf prayer carpet, anotherpart of which is in the Wher Collection. Two fragments in theKeir Collection, acquired from Salvadori in Florence, add to thepicture of Damascus carpet design. One has small palmettescov ering the field in the Iranian manner. The other has a fieldof lobed medallions altering with ‘Damascus’-style stars; in thecentre is a large eight-pointed star medallion. The field is sur -rounded by a border of cartouches with cloudbands and eight-lobed medallions.

A fragment from a large carpet with a field of scrolling vinesand large palmettes in the Iranian manner and a border some -what resembling the wavy lines and balls of the çintamani designwas given in 1991 to the Metropolitan Museum of Art by theMarshall & Marilyn R. Wolf Foundation. Four other Damascuscarpets were found in the Great Mosque at DirviÌi, along withthe two ‘para-Mamluks’. Two of these are probably from Syriaand the other two are attributed to southeast Anatolia when itwas still part of the Mamluk Empire. One of the Syrian rugs hasdiagonal rows of diamond-shaped medallions separated by adiamond-shaped lattice composed of small leaves, with a smalltree-like form in each medallion. The other has rows of palm -ettes alternating with cloudbands. One of the southeast Anatolianrugs has an eight-pointed star medallion with four wheel-likeoctagons. The other has a large leaf pattern that forms adiagonal lattice with small rosettes in each compartment.

If we compare the few rugs from Egypt and the East Mediter -ranean region currently in collections in Berlin, London, NewYork and in particular The Textile Museum in Washington DC,

the MIAQ has some way to go to build a truly exciting and inter -esting collection in this area. An earlier Mamluk carpet, a CaireneOttoman rug woven on silk, a ‘para-Mamluk’, a large ‘compart -ment’ carpet or indeed a ‘Damascus’ with an unusual designwould all be significant additions. Some examples still survivein private collections, although great items rarely come ontothe market, and to find rugs with original pile, pristine coloursand excellent drawing is an even greater challenge. However, itis to be hoped that this small but very good group of rugs fromthis region will continue to be expanded to create somethingreally special in the Muslim world.

16 The Muse East

Med iterranean car -

touche-border car pet

(border section),

Damascus, Syria,

15th or 16th century.

0.15 x 0.46m (6" x

1'6"). MIAQ, no.TE14

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

84 HALI ISSUE 157

1 George Hewitt Myers, founder of the

Textile Museum, Washington DC, was

one of several collectors and connois -

seurs in the first half of the 20th century

who greatly admired Spanish and East

Medi ter ranean carpets. He acquired 22

Spanish carpets from the classical period

as well as 31 East Mediterranean carpets

(16 Mamluk-style Egyptian rugs, ten Otto -

man-style Egyptian rugs and five ‘Damas -

cus’ rugs), published in two separate mon o -

graphs (Textile Museum 1953, 1957).

2 Those with important large collections

have included: Count Johannes von Wel -

czeck, George Hewitt Meyers, Don José

de Weissberger, Charles Deering, Wendy

and Emery Reves. Other collectors have

had a number of examples, including:

Archer Milton Huntington, John D.

McIl henny, Joseph Lees Williams,

George Blumenthal, the Marquis de

Valverde, James F. Ballard, John Emery,

Baron & Baroness Thyssen-Bornemisza,

the Mar quesa de Bermejillo del Rey,

Sidney A. Charlat, Marino & Clara

Dall’Oglio and Frederick Pratt.

3 To name but a few: Vitall Benguiat and

Mayorcas in New York; Böhler, Munich;

Adolfo Loewi, Venice; Stefano Bardini,

Florence; Michel Campana and Elio Cittone

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

in London; and Sammy Tarica, Yves Mikael -

off, Masson, Benadava and Catan in Paris.

Interestingly, most of the examples were

acquired by dealers of Spanish Sephardic

origins and few by Armenian dealers.

4 These illustrations of classical Spanish

knotted-pile carpets have been taken

from museum inventories and archives,

the carpet literature, sale catalogues and

examples that have come to the market.

I am sure that these records are by no

means complete and it is possible that as

many as 150 further items are not recor -

ded, but it is unlikely that any important

early example would not have been

pub lished and come to my attention. The

major museums with Spanish carpets

are in Madrid, Berlin, London, New York,

Miami, Dallas and Washington, with indi -

vidual notable examples in Paris, St Louis,

Cleveland and Detroit. Over the past

thirty years, 29 examples have passed

through my studio in London.

5The latter coming from Arraiolos, where

workshops were certainly started in the

16th century; many of the oldest exam -

ples copy Safavid Iranian carpets, others

copy Anatolian rugs and Arraiolos carpets.

6 Examples can be found in: Museum of

Islamic Art, Cairo; Textile Museum, Wash -

ington DC; Metropolitan Museum of Art,

New York; National Museum, Stockholm;

Röhss Museum, Gothenburg; Keir Col lec -

tion, Ham; Museum of Islamic Art, Doha

(MIAQ), Benaki Museum, Athens.

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

possibly originally 178 x 312cm. 1st to

3rd century AD. Xinjiang Institute of Arch -

ae ology, Urumqi, no.M15:1. Excavated at

Yingpan, tomb no.15. Published: König

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

reconstruction, with technical descrip tion);

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

dia gram of structure showing single warp

offset knotting).

8 Serjeant 1972, p.175 (referring to

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

“They used to make fine and valuable

carpets (busut) at Murcia. The people of

Murcia have unequalled skill in manufac-

turing and decorating these carpets.”

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

century. 64 x 182cm, section. Halber stadt

Cathedral Treasury. Published: Wilckens

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

(2) Border fragment with palmettes. 12th

century. 20 x 400cm. Halberstadt Cath -

edral Treasury. Published: Wilckens 1992,

pp.103, 105, fig.13.

(3) Wedding of Mercury and Philologia

carpet. (a–e) Five fragments (originally

590 x 740cm). 1186–1203. Quedlinburg

Cathedral Treasury. Published: Kurth 1926,

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

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

ment. Whereabouts unknown. Formerly:

Welczek Collection, Austria (to 1945).

Pub lished: Kurth 1926, II, pl.21a; Wilc k ens

1992, p.100 (cited).

10 Two paintings depicting early Spanish

carpets that have been cut and reduced

in size: (1) Presentation in the Temple.

Francisco Henriques, ca. 1508–1511. Oil

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

Alpiarça. From the altarpiece of the main

chapel of the church in the Convento de

São Francisco, Évora. Published: Lisbon

2007, p.59. Carpet with octagons and

lozenge pattern. (2) Mass of Saint Greg -

ory. Francisco Henriques, c. 1508–1511.

Oil on wood, 88 x 121.5cm. Museu

Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon. From the

altarpiece of the main chapel of the church

in the Convento de São Francisco, Évora.

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

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

in octagons and lozenges, ‘Kufic’ border.

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

of the ‘Admiral’ car pets, pointed out that

it is impossible to estimate the number

of surviving exam ples: “Without

considering border frag ments, two or

more pieces may be from a single rug,

and conversely, the skilful joining and

patching of carpets carried out in Spanish

convents points to the pos sibility of

several parts of different rugs being

combined into what, in a photograph,

appears to be a complete carpet.”

12 I have yet to find a document to

con fir m this. Eleanor of Castile was

mar ried in October 1254 at the age of ten

to King Edward I of England, then fifteen,

at Las Huelgas .

13 By Matteo di Giovanetti da Viterbo. It

is not certain that the Popes’ carpets are

Spanish – it is possible that they were

made in France in the Spanish style. For

more than 300 years from the early 13th

century in Paris, two separate guilds of

carpet-makers existed side by side, the

Tapiciers sarrazinois and the Tapiciers

nostres. As the name implies, the Sara -

cenic carpet weavers were engaged in

manufacturing carpets based upon East -

ern originals, while the other guild pro -

duced carpets in a local style. [Pinner]

1978, taken from Boileau 1897.

14 King 1986, pp.131–7.

15 Madrid 1933.

16 It is known from paintings and doc -

uments that both Spanish and oriental

carpets were used in European churches

and synagogues from the Middle Ages

onwards; some were made specifically

for altars or as ark curtains, probably

ordered by wealthy patrons. The Von

Bode synagogue rug. 14th century. 95 x

385cm. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

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

tedly from a church in the Tyrol district,

1880s; art market, Munich, 1884; Wilhelm

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

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

1907; Thomson 1910, pl.IIc; Kendrick and

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection 1998,

p.239, fig.1.

17 Pinner 1986, p.295.

18 The field and border patterns on one

carpet were clealry changed as the rug

was being made. The Myers palmettes in

interlaced lattice carpet. Mid- to second

half 15th century. 184 x 219cm, incom p -

lete in length. Textile Museum, Wash ing -

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

George Hewitt Myers Collection, acquired

1927. Published: American Art Associa -

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

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

–XI (with structure analysis); Weeks and

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

structure analysis). Exhibited: Washing ton

DC 1972; Washington DC 2003, ‘Carpets

of Andalusia’. Blue ground; lower part has

a different design, similar to borders of

armorial carpets.

19 After the Popes’ fresco in Avignon,

dating from the first half of the 14th

cen tury, a number of other carpets with

small lattice field designs are depicted in

paint ings from the early 16th century

(see note 10 above, and Lisbon 2007).

20 Seven have identifiable coats-of-arms;

three of these may be complete, and

the others are shortened in length. Two

short ened carpets have unidentified

blazons. Five shortened carpets, mostly

still with their borders, are without

blazons. Frag ments survive from at

least thirteen other such carpets.

21 Beattie 1986.

22 May 1945; Beattie 1986.

23 One example depicts a wild boar, not

an appropriate subject for an Islamic rug.

It may well be that the Admiral carpets

were woven by Muslim weavers to

patterns supplied by their clients.

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

embles the elem on Salor Turkmen door

rugs or ensi. These unusual patterns were

surely part of a tradition that drew upon

both local textile designs and impor ted

carpets and textiles for inspiration.

25 Pinner 1986 lists some forty docu -

ments between 1527–1622 that refer to

Turkish carpets in Spanish inventories,

some with ‘Kufic’ borders with interlace.

26 Two Spanish carpets with the inter -

laced medallion ‘small-pattern’ Holbein

design: (1) The Boston interlaced medal -

lion carpet. 106 x 462cm. Museum of

Fine Arts, Boston, no.39.614. Published:

Erdmann 1960, fig.175 (detail); Schlosser

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(detail). Exhibited: Washington DC 1972;

London 1983; Boston, Museum

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

Boston, Museum of Fine Arts, ‘Oriental

Carpets and Kilims’, 23 July 1990 to early

January 1991; Boston, Museum of Fine

Arts, ‘Ambassadors from the East: Oriental

Carpets in the Museum of Fine Arts, Bos -

ton’, 29 Sept ember 1998 to 24 January

1999. (2) The Loewi inter laced medallion

carpet. 155 x 290cm. Tex tile Museum,

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

acquired 1926. Formerly: Adolfo Loewi

Collection, Venice; George Hewitt Myers

Collection. Published: Textile Mus eum

1953, p.27, pls XXIV–XXV (with struc ture

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

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

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

NOTES

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 85

Washington DC 2003, pp.22, 283 (with

structure analysis); Bier 2004, p.13.

27 The Welczeck endless knot design

carpet. Late 15th or early 16th century.

Formerly: Count Welczeck Collection.

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

Wher Collection. Formerly: The Textile

Gallery, London. Published: Gantzhorn

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

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

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

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

250cm, section of field and border. Chris

Alexander Collection, Berkeley. Formerly:

The Textile Gallery, London; Wher Collec t -

ion. Published: Lefevre, London, 18 June

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

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

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

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

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

and border. Museum für angewandte

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

lished: Museum für angewandte Kunst,

Frankfurt, Neuerwerbungen, 1956–1974,

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

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

no.166 (cited). (d) Incomplete, bot tom half,

reduced in width? Whereabouts unknown.

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

Alexander Collection 1993, pp.114–19

(“Although current dating has tended to

ascribe this carpet a 15th cen tury date, I

am certain in my own mind that this

dating is not correct…This car pet was

probably woven in the 10th or 11th

century and certainly no later than the

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

conversation the relationship of the field

design of this carpet to certain ceiling

designs in southern Spain.

28 Two Spanish carpets with rows of

small octagons: (1) The Lionel Harris

thirty octagons carpet. 214 x 460cm.

Victoria & Albert Museum, London,

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

a convent in Spain; Lionel Harris

& Co., London. Published: Victoria and

Albert Museum 1915, no.345, pl.XXXIX

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

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

(detail); Ferr andis Torres 1942, fig.19;

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

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

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

chez Ferrer 1986, pp.354–5, pl.XXXVII

(with structure analysis); Gantzhorn 1991,

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

(2) The Welczeck small octagons carpet.

38 x 70cm, frag ment. Whereabouts

unknown. Formely: Count Welczeck

Collection. Published: Madrid 1933,

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

Madrid 1933.

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

Vittore Carpaccio (Venice 1472 – Capodis -

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

Gallerie dell’Accademia, Venice.

30 Annunciation with Saint Emidius. Carlo

Crivelli (Venice – about 1430/5 – about

1494), 1486. Egg tempera and oil on

canvas transferred from wood, 207 x

146.7cm. National Gallery, London,

no.NG739.

31 Pentecost. Anonymous [possibly

Garcia Fernandes, Portuguese Royal

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

132.5 x 165cm. Ermida de Nossa Senhora

dos Remédios, Lisbon. Published: Lisbon

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

two columns and four rows; at each end

is an extra panel with bird-like creatures

separated by ‘Kufic’-style uprights.

32 The Convent of Santa Ursula large

octagon carpet. (a) Lower part, 103 x

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

Formerly: Reportedly from the Convent of

Santa Ursula, Guadalajara; Adolfo Loewi

Collection, Venice, no.7.419b; Benedava,

Paris; Wher Collection. Published: Ferr -

andis Torres 1942, fig.15; Gamal 1963;

Milan, Palazzo Reale, 1974; Ellis 1986,

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

four octagons. Textile Museum, Washing -

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

1931. Formerly: Reportedly from the

Convent of Santa Ursula, Guadalajara;

Adolfo Loewi Collection, Venice; George

Hewitt Myers Collection, Washington DC.

Published: Textile Museum 1953, p.17,

pls. XVI–XVII (with structure analy sis);

Bunt 1966, fig.46; Weeks and Tre gan -

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exhibited: Washington DC 1972; Wash -

ington DC, 2003, ‘Carpets of Andalusia’.

33 Although the Venetian painter Lorenzo

Lotto depicted carpets of this type only

twice in approximately 250 known works

– both fairly late in his career, in 1542 and

1547 – his name has become irrevocably

linked with them: Sant’ Antonio Elemo -

sin ario Giving Alms, 1542, church of SS.

Giovanni e Paolo, Venice (Mills 1981,

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

National Gallery, London (Mills 1981,

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

depiction in a European painting of an

Anatolian arabesque rug is in fact in a

painting by the Venetian artist Sebastiano

del Piombo (ca. 1486, Venice – 1547,

Rome), dated 1516, in the National Gal -

lery, Washington DC: Cardinal Bandinello

Sauli, His Secretary and Two Geog raph -

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

34 The Qatar arabesque carpet. 16th

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

Formerly: Private collection, Switzerland.

Published: Christie’s, London, 14 October

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

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

35 Some Spanish carnation carpets:

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

199cm. Museo del Instituto Valencia de

Don Juan, Madrid. Published: Sánchez

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

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

Whereabouts unknown. Formerly: Livinio

Stuyck Collection, Madrid. Published:

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

Exhibited: Madrid 1933. (2) The Valverde

carnation carpet. 52 x 62cm, section.

Museo del Instituto Valencia de Don Juan,

Madrid. Formerly: Marquis de Valverde

Collection. Published: Faraday 1927(1),

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

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

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

analysis). (3) The Ballard carna tion carpet.

140 x 275cm. Metropolitan Museum of

Art, New York, no.22.100.124. Formerly:

James F. Ballard Collection. Pub lished:

New York 1923, no.127; Met ro politan

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

fig.224 (with structure analy sis). Exhibited:

New York 1923. (4) The Krauth carnation

carpet. 94 x 132cm, section. Museum of

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

merly: Consul Krauth, Krefeld, in 1888;

Kunstgewerbemuseum, Berlin. Published:

Museum of Islamic Art 1988, pp.122 and

283, no.144 (with struc ture analysis). (5)

The Toledo carnation car pet. Private col -

lection, New York. For merly: Said to be

from a convent chapel, Toledo; Lenygon &

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

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

bottom half. Published: Thomson 1910,

p.109 (detail); Sánchez Ferrer 1986,

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

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

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

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

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

Published: Lefevre, Lon don, 2 April 1976,

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

New York, 13 April 1995, lot 139 (with

structure analysis). (6) The Emery

carnation carpet. 287 x 620cm. Cincinnati

Museum of Art, no.1966.638. Formerly:

John Emery Collection. Pub lished: Adams

1971, p.273 (detail); Cin cin nati Art Museum

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

The Art Quarterly, vol.XXIX, nos 3–4,

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

1976, lot 7 (cited); Master pieces from the

Cin cin nati Art Museum, 1984, p.42.

Almost the pair to the Toledo carpet. (7)

The Spier carnation carpet. 56 x 48cm,

section. Vic toria & Albert Museum,

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

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

pl.XLI (with struct ure analysis); Day 1989,

p.324, fig.320.

36 Some Spanish carpets with the ‘Eur -

op ean’ carnation pattern: (1) The Marquesa

de Bermejillo del Rey carnation carpet.

435 x 220cm. Museo Nacional de Artes

Decorativas, Madrid, no.19.222. Formerly:

Marquesa de Bermejillo del Rey. Published:

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

ail); Museo Nacional de Artes Decora tivas

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

1933. (2) The Welczeck carnation carpet.

153 x 28cm. Whereabouts unknown.

For merly: Count de Welczeck Collection.

Pub lished: Madrid 1933, p.109, no.18,

pl.XIII (detail); Sánchez Ferrer 1986,

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

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

Victoria & Albert Museum carnation carpet.

150 x 292cm. Victoria and Albert Museum,

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

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

Wel c zeck medallion and carnation carpet.

105 x 182cm. Whereabouts unknown.

For merly: Count de Welczeck Collection.

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

pl.XII. Exhibited: Madrid 1933.

37 Two Spanish carpets with a cloud

design from Chinese Mongol silks:

(1) The Dum barton Oaks clouds carpet.

152 x 373cm. Textile Museum, Washing -

ton DC, no.1976.10.3. Formerly: Dum bar -

ton Oaks Collec t ion. Published: Wash ing -

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

analysis). Exhibited: Wash ington DC 1972;

Washing ton DC 2003. (2) The Madrid

clouds carpet. Section. Museo Nacional

de Artes Decorativas, Mad rid, no.1.742.

Published: Museo Nac ional de Artes

Decorativas 2002, p.96, pl.24.

Two Turkish rugs with a cloud pattern

from Chinese Mongol silks: (1) The Ala -

eddin Mongol silk pattern rug. Central

Anatolia, 14th century. 121 x 240cm.

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts,

Istanbul, no.688. Formerly: Alaeddin

Mosque, Konya. Published: Aslanapa

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

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

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

[Anon] 1988, pattern code 0108; Aslan apa

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

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts

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

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

pattern rug. Ushak, late 15th century.

Possibly origin ally 75 x 350cm. (a) 57.5 x

156cm, section. Museum of Islamic Art,

Berlin, no.1885. 985. Formerly: Wilhelm

Bode; Kunst ge wer bemuseum, Berlin.

Published: Ender lein 1979, fig.1; Florence

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

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

165cm, section. Bardini Museum, Flor ence.

Pub lished: Florence 1999, pp.74–5, no.22.

Two Mongol cloud pattern silks, 13th–14th

cen t ury: (1) Metro politan Museum of Art,

NewYork, no.46. 156.20. Published: Mac -

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

others published by Agnes Geijer (1963,

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

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

86 HALI ISSUE 157

eum, St Peters burg, no.LT-449. Discov -

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

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

38 Some Spanish carpets with rows of

lobed medallions: (1) The Costikyan-Pope

lobed-medallion carpet. 81 x 72cm, section

of central field and borders. Textile Mus -

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

1915. Formerly: Kent Costikyan and A.U.

Pope, New York; George Hewitt Myers

Col lection, Washington DC. Published:

Tex tile Museum 1953, p.23, pl.XXI (with

struc ture analysis); Weeks and Tregan owan

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

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

ly sis); Bier 1992, p.62, fig.12; Washington

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

analysis). Exhibited: Washington DC 2003,

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

medallion carpet. 86 x 190cm, section. Tex t -

ile Museum, Washington DC, no.R44.2.3

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

Loewi Collection, Venice; George Hewitt

Myers Collection, Washington DC. Pub -

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

(with structure analysis); Mackie 1979,

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

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

fig.1; Wash ington DC 2003, pp.20, 283,

fig.18 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

Washington DC, 2003, ‘Carpets of Anda -

lusia’. (3) The Madrid lobed-medallion

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

and border. Insti tuto de Valencia de

Don Juan, Madrid. Published: Gamal

1963; Sánchez Ferrer 1986, pp.384–5,

pl.LII (detail, with struc ture analysis).

(b) 87 x 126cm, incom p lete. Whereabouts

unknown. Formerly: Count Welczeck

Collection. Published: Madrid 1933, p.107,

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

A Spanish carpet with off set rows of

lobed medallions: The Madrid offset

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

section of field and border. Instituto de

Valencia de Don Juan, Madrid. Pub lished:

Sánchez Ferrer 1986, pp.382–3, pl.LI

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

60cm, section of bor der and field. Museo

Arquelógico Nacional, Madrid. Pub lished:

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

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

border. Where abouts unknown. Published:

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

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

20 x 9cm. Private collection, Los Angeles.

Formerly: Alcala Subastas, Madrid; The

Textile Gallery, London.

39 Some Spanish carpets with palmettes

in an interlaced lattice: (1) The Charleston

interlaced lattice carpet. 75 x 142cm,

frag mentary, incomplete in length.

Wher Collection. Formerly: Charleston

Mus eum, Charleston; The Textile Gallery,

London. Published: Sotheby’s, New

York, 24 Sept ember 1991, lot 1 (with

structure analy sis); HALI 60, 1991, p.154.

(2) The Ben guiat interlaced lattice carpet.

165 x 234cm. Textile Museum, Washing -

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

Vital Ben guiat Collection, George Hewitt

Myers Collection, Washington DC, 1920.

Pub lished: Amercian Art Association 1920,

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

pls.XVIII–XIX (with structure analysis);

Weeks and Treganowan 1969, p.17;

Washington DC 1972, no.31; Mackie

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

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

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th edition;

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

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

analysis); Collins 1988, p.44; Faraday

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

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

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

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

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

(with structure analysis). Exhibited: Wash -

ington DC 1972; London 1983; Washing -

ton DC, 2003, ‘Carpets of Andalusia’.

(3) The Weissberger interlaced lattice

carpet. 125 x 215cm. Museo Nacional

de Artes Decorativas, Madrid, no.3.407.

For merly: Don José A. de Weissberger

Col lection, Madrid, no.3. Published: Mad -

rid 1933, p.108, no.14, pl.XI; Cam pana

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

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

analysis); Museo Nacional de Artes

Dec orativas 1996, pp.36–7, no.1 (with

struc ture analy sis); Museo Nacional

de Artes Decora tivas 2002, pp.82–3.

Exhibited: Madrid 1933. (4) The Charlat

interlaced lattice carpet. 239 x 521cm.

Metroplitan Museum of Art, New York,

Cloisters Collection, no.61.49. Formerly:

Sidney A. Charlat Collection. Published:

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

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

tan Museum of Art 1958, fig.13; Dimand

1964, fig.13; Weeks and Treganowan 1969,

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

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

fig.222 (with structure analysis); Sherrill

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

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

pl.LVI (with structure analysis); Faraday

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

interlaced lattice carpet. 150 x 241cm.

Brooklyn Museum, New York, no.43.24.6.

Formerly: Mr & Mrs Frederick Pratt. Pub -

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

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

Museum interlaced lattice carpet. 162 x

228cm, reduced in length. Victoria & Albert

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

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

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

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

(with structure analysis); Thomson 1925,

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

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

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

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

Kalebdjian interlaced lattice carpet. 152 x

254cm, reconstituted from pieces of the

original. Musée Historique des Tissus,

Lyons, no.27.658, acquired 1905. Form -

erly: Kalebdjian, Paris. Published: Bennett

1987, p.32, fig.XIX (with struct ure analy -

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

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

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

incomplete in length. Textile Museum,

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

Formerly: George Hewitt Myers Collect -

ion, acquired 1927. Published: American

Art Association, New York, 30 April 1927,

lot 1040, p.335; Textile Museum 1953,

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

Weeks and Tre ganowan 1969, p.13, top

(detail); Wash ington DC 1972, no.35 (cited);

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

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

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

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

fig.3; Wash ington DC 2003, pp.28, 284,

fig.26 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

Washing ton DC 1972; Washington DC,

2003, ‘Car pets of Andalusia’. Blue ground.

Lower part has a different design, similar

to bor ders of armorial carpets. (b) 104 x

108cm, section. Wher Collection. Form -

erly: Bern heimer Collection, Munich,

acq uired 1951; The Textile Gallery, London.

Published: Bernheimer 1959, pl.121;

Chris tie’s, Lon don, 14 February 1996, lot

75 (with struc t ure analysis); HALI 86,

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

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

laced lattice carpet. Where abouts

unknown. Formerly: Perez, Amster dam.

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

Bunt 1966, fig 47. (10) The Welczeck

interlaced lattice carpet 1. 157 x 90cm,

section of field and border. Where abouts

unknown. Formerly: Count Welc zeck

Collection. Published: Madrid 1933,

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

1933. (11) The McMullan interlaced lattice

carpet. Section. Metropolitan Museum of

Art, New York, no.57.150.90. Formerly:

Joseph V. McMullan Collection. Published:

Metropolitan Museum of Art 1973, p.258

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

Welczeck interlaced lattice carpet 2. 115 x

218cm. Whereabouts unknown. For merly:

Count Welczeck Collection. Pub lished:

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

ited: Madrid 1933.

40 The Reves palmettes in ogival lattice

silk carpet. 197 x 118cm. Wendy & Emery

Reves Collection, Dallas Museum of Art,

no.1985.R.87. Published: Philadelphia

Mus eum of Art 1988, p.256 (cited). The

Dallas museum has ten Spanish carpets

acquired by the Reves from Tarica in Paris.

41 The Unger palmettes in diamond-

shaped lattice silk carpet. 58 x 76cm,

fragment. MIAQ, no.TE12. Formerly:

Unger Collection, Mexico; The Textile

Gallery, London; Wher Collection.

Pub lished: Sotheby’s, London, 10

December 1992, lot 4.

42 The Sasson confronting lions brocade

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

442cm, incomplete in length. Victoria &

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

Formerly: J. Sasson & Co., London.

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

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

Victoria and Albert Museum 1915/1920,

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

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

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

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

(detail); Victoria and Albert Museum 1931,

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

1986, pp.418–9, pl.LXIX (detail, with

structure analysis); Faraday 1990, p.41,

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

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

43 Three early Spanish carpets with

wreaths: (1) The Paris wreaths in com -

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

complete compartments with end panels,

reduced in size from a larger carpet. MIAQ,

no.TE106. Formerly: Paris art market; New

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

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

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

wreaths. Whereabouts unknown. Form -

erly: Paris art market. (2) The Böhler

wreaths in compartments carpet. 212

x 100cm, section with two complete

wreaths. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

no.KGM 94.413. Formerly: Böhler, Munich;

Kunstgewerbemuseum, Berlin. Published:

Museum of Islamic Art 1988, pp.121,

280, no.140 (with structure anlaysis);

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

wreaths in compartments carpet. 198 x

457cm, ten complete and two partial

wreaths. Villa Vizcaya, Dade County Art

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

merly: James Deering Collect ion, Miami,

bought at auction in New York, 7 January

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

44 The Mikaeloff wreaths carpet. 16th

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

four complete wreaths. MIAQ. Formerly:

Galerie Yves Mikaeloff, Paris. Published:

Christie’s, London, 16 October 1997, lot

101. (b) Central section with borders, 173

x 208cm, four wreaths. Whereabouts

unknown. Published: Sotheby’s, New York,

5 December 1987, lot 55 (with structure

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

London, 10 April 2008, lot 94. Formerly:

New England art dealer, 1987; private

collection, Texas.

45 Louisa Bellinger analysed the Textile

Museum collection in 1953. Structure

analysis can now be much more detailed.

46Wall paintings are said to show that

weaving with coloured wools to make

covers and tapestries may well have

been practised in one of the oldest urban

settlements at Çatal Hüyük in Anatolia,

almost 9,000 years ago (Mellaart 1967;

Maréchal 1985; Mellaart et al. 1989).

47 Looped pile fragments discovered at

Deir el-Bahri. See Petzel 1987.

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

Arts Museums of San Francisco. For merly:

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 87

reportedly excavated at Fustat (old Cairo)

in the 1920s; private collection, Paris;

Soustiel, Paris; The Textile Gallery and

Bashir Mohammed, London. Published:

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

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

ween the second half of the 7th and

the end of the 9th century AD.

49 Examples survive in several major

museum collections. The largest single

group is in Sweden (Lamm 1937; Stock -

holm 1985). The Benaki Museum in Athens

has thirty fragments, many with knotted-

pile but some in looped-pile tech nique

(Theologou 2008). Other fragments: Mus -

eum of Islamic Art, Cairo; Textile Museum,

Washington DC; Metropolitan Museum of

Art, New York; Keir Collection, Ham; Lloyd

Cotsen Collection, Los Angeles.

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

Irwin and Donald Little’s research on Arabic

references during this period (Irwin 1986;

Little 1984; Little 1986; Little 1998).

51 Thompson (2006, pp.126–7, fig.108

and note 107) illustrates a small border

fragment from Fustat with a Kufic-style

border and asymmetrical knotting and

attributes it to the Mamluk period, prob -

ably 14th century Egypt. The attribution

appears to be based on its structure,

even though Thompson expresses doubts

about certain aspects of the analysis by

Hoskins (2002) on which he relies. From

the illustration the warps look like Z2S

wool, not S-spun linen as recor ded. It is

hard to see the spin of the pile yarn, and

the spin of the wefts is not discernable in

the illustration. The carpet should be re-

examined before attempting to make a

serious attribution as to its origin.

52 Two mid-15th century fragments

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

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

v ated in Fustat, Old Cairo. Published:

Lamm 1937, pp.110–11, no.19; Stock holm

1985, p 49, no.19 (with structure

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

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

21.5cm. National Museum, Stockholm,

no.232/1939. Excavated in Fustat, Old

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

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

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

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

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

attributed them with confidence to Egypt.

54 E.g. Housego 1986; Suriano 2004.

55 See note 62 below.

56 The Medici Mamluk carpet with three

medallions. 409 x 1088cm. Argenti Mus -

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

merly: Grand Duke Cosimo I de’ Medici;

Medici Grand Dukes, Florence. Published:

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

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

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

p.231 (cited, with structure analysis);

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ails and structure analysis); Spallan zani

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

Exhibited: Venice 1993; Florence 2002;

Prato 2006. One of the largest antique

oriental carpets known; entered the Medici

archives between 1561 and 1571.

57 Boralevi 1986: “Un tappeto Cairino

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

a quella Guardaroba a di 29 di Dicembre

1587.” The carpet is identified not only by

its dimensions but also by the invent ory

number painted on the back. Spallan zani

2007, p.55: The Medici carpet was taken

from Florence to Rome in the 16th

century and then returned to Florence. It

“is not mentioned in the inventories of

1553–4 or of 1560, but can be identified

in some documents dated 1571–2”. This

does not prove that it was made in Cairo,

but it shows that in the latter part of the

16th century it was thought to have come

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

150) expands on this and rightly questions

the supposition it was without doubt made

in Cairo: two other carpets listed in the

inventory are almost certainly mislabel led,

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

Both would appear to be Iranian. Perhaps

one was described as Cairene because it

reached Italy via Alexandria, and the other

had passed through Istan bul (many

carpets described as ‘Iranian’ passed

through Istanbul at that time).

58 The San Rocco Mamluk carpet with

three medallions. 375 x 970cm. Arcicon -

fraternita di San Rocco, Venice. Published:

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

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

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

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

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

after 1541.

59 Pinner 1986, pp.293–4.

60 I have examined 92 of the 136 Mamluk-

style carpets for which I have images

(another 17 are recorded in the lit erature

but not illustrated). I have sorted them in

the first instance by period and then by

pattern schemes. They comprise: two

Fustat fragments (excluding the symmet-

rically knotted example in Alexandria pro -

posed by W.G. Thomson); nine ‘First

period’, probably before 1500; 28 ‘Second

period’, probably first quarter of the 16th

century; 98 ‘Third period’, probably second

and third quarter of the 16th century; eight

‘Transitional’, with Mamluk and Ottoman

designs, probably second half of the 16th

century. Kurt Erdmann, whose work on

these carpets remains the most detailed

to date, sorted Mamluk carpets into groups

by their compositions in order to identify

them more easily. His classification has

been followed and adapted by other

authors. Following Erdmann and Bösch, I

have arranged the Mamluk car pets in my

archive as follows. A, Multiple medallions:

A1 Five medallions (1); A2 Three medal -

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

Bands with two sections (1); B2 Bands

with three or more sections (21); B3 Bands

with three or more sections and palms/

cypresses (18); B4 Undivided bands with

palms/cypresses (7); B5 Undivided bands

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

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

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

with blazon (3); D2 Related examples with -

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

F, Circular (3). G, Unclassifiable fragments

(8). H, Unsor ted, no images on file (17).

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

ments from 15th century carpets (2).

61 The Salvadori three-medallion Mamluk

carpet. 153 x 218cm, about half the original

width of an end section. Victoria & Albert

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

erly: Giuseppe Salvadori, Florence (acq -

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

fig.12 (with structure analysis); Thom p son

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

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

(detail), p.42, fig.1 (with struc ture

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

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

ture analysis); Gantz horn 1991, pp.203–4,

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

Exhibited: London 1983.

62 Three Mamluk carpets with blazons:

(1) The Bardini Mamluk carpet with

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

field and border from left hand side of a

very large carpet. Textile Museum, Wash -

ing ton DC, no.1965.49.1. Formerly: Stefano

Bardini, Florence; Heidi Vollmöller, Switz -

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

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

with structure analysis; Ellis suggests the

carpet was once about 450 x 1100cm);

Camman 1972, p.48 (cited); Washington

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

analysis); Washington DC 1981, p.228

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

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

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

Housego 1986, p.232, fig.17 (with struc t -

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

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

–9, no.88; Isaacson 1991, p.44; Gantz horn

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

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

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

wan dte Kunst 2001, p 38 (cited); Farn ham

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

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

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

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

DC, Textile Museum, ‘Mamluk and Otto -

man Carpets’, 1970; Washington DC 1980;

Washington DC 1981; London 1983; Wash -

ington DC 1991–92; Washington DC, Tex -

tile Museum, ‘Oriental Carpet Classics: A

Tribute to Charles Grant Ellis’, 1997; Wash -

ington DC, Textile Museum, ‘Mamluk Rugs

from Egypt’, March to September 2003.

(b-r) 17 fragments, approximately two-

thirds of the original carpet, 456 x 945cm.

Bardini Museum, Florence, nos.526–542.

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

and front cover (fragment); Suriano 1996;

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

with TM fragment, reconstruc t ion), p.76,

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

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

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

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

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

pp.24–7, no.1 (with structure analysis);

Boralevi 1999, p.79 (details of one frag -

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

Museum für Angewandte Kunst 2001,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Florence 1996; Florence 1999; Florence

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

luk carpet with blazons. 341 x 415cm,

probably reduced in length. Metropolitan

Museum of Art, New York, no.1970.135.

Formerly: Piero Barbieri Col lection, Genoa;

Joseph Pulitzer Col lection, 1970. Pub lished:

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

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

ture analy sis); Housego 1986, p.236 (cited,

with struct ure analysis); Bösch 1991,

p.380, no.90; Suriano 1998, p.75, figs.4

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

Thompson 2006, p.127 (cited); Okumura

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

structure analysis). (3) The Bruschettini

Mamluk carpet with blazons. Three frag -

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

358cm. Bruschettini Foundation, Genoa,

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

The Textile Gallery, London. Published:

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

Some related Mamluk carpets without

blazons:( 1) The Kelekian six-colour

Mamluk carpet with large star medallion.

36 x 160cm, section of field and small

piece of border. Textile Museum, Washing -

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

Formerly: Kelekian Collec tion; K. Beshir.

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

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

(with structure analysis); Housego 1986,

p.239 (cited, with structure analy sis); Bösch

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

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

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

analysis). Exhibited: Washington DC 1991

–92; Washington DC, Textile Mus eum,

‘Mamluk Rugs from Egypt’, March to

September 2003. (2) The London Mamluk

carpet with plain field and star. D. Katz,

USA. Formerly: The Textile Gallery, London.

63Two other first-period Mamluk carpets:

(1) The Vienna Mamluk carpet with three

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

88 HALI ISSUE 157

medallions. Twelve fragments, represent -

ing over three-quarters of the carpet (app -

roximately 223 x 550cm). Österreich isches

Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

no.T8348, acquired in 1922. Formerly:

Habs burg Imperial Collection, Vienna. Pub -

lished: Sarre and Trenkwald 1926, vol.I,

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

separate carpets); Museum für Kunst und

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

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

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

(with structure analysis); Bode and Kühnel

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

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

structure ana lysis); Völker 1979, p.13, fig.1;

Housego 1986, p.236 (cited, with

structure analy sis); Bösch 1991, p.349,

no.5 (cited, with struc t ure analysis); Gan -

tz horn 1991, pp.198–201, figs.298–304;


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

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

with structure analysis); Suriano 2004,

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

no.70 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

Vienna, Museum für angewandte Kunst,

‘Sym metric and Asymmetric Knots:

Oriental Knotted Carpets from the MAK

Collect ion’, 11 December 2002 to 23

March 2003. (2) The Salvadori three-

medallion Mamluk carpet. 153 x 218cm,

about half the original width of an end

section. Victoria & Albert Museum, Lon -

don, no.150-1908. Formerly: Giuseppe

Salva dori, Florence (acquired in Italy). Pub -

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

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

King 1981, p 36 (cited); Pinner and

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

fig.1 (with structure analysis); Lon don

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

fig.19 (with structure analysis); Bösch

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

analysis); Gantzhorn 1991, p.203–4,

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


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

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

ture analysis); Gilles and Franses 2005,

p.93, fig.7; Okumura 2007, pp.222–3,

no.61 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

London 1983; Paris 2004.

64 Transitional Mamluk-Ottoman carpets:

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

Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin, no.KGM

1884.899. Published: Erdmann 1940,

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

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

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

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

New York, 27 September 2000, p.26

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

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

Bayerisches Nationalmuseum, Munich.

Published: Erdmann 1940, fig.19; Textile

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

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

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

Franz Bausback, Mannheim. Formerly:

Mercer Trust. Published: HALI 111, 2000,

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

ber 2000, lot 48 (with structure analysis);

Maastricht 2002, pp.178–9; HALI 120,

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

ited: Maastricht 2002. (4) The Edirne floral

lattice carpet. 384 x 317cm. Museum of

Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, no.172.

Formerly: Hazinedar Sinan Bey Mosque,

Edirne. Published: Museum of Turkish and

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

structure analysis). (5) The Benguiat floral

medallion on lattice carpet. 138 x 188cm.

Textile Museum, Washington DC,

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

erly: Vitall & Leopold Benguiat Collection.

Published: American Art Association 1932,

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

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

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

Thom pson 1980, p.12 (cited); Ellis 1981,

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

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

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

structure analysis); Okumura 2007, pp.218 -

–21, no 60 (with details and struct ure

analysis). Exhibited: Washington DC, Tex -

tile Museum, ‘Mamluk and Ottoman Car -

pets’, May to September 1970; Wash ing -

ton DC 1991–92; Washington DC, Tex tile

Museum, ‘Mamluk Rugs from Egypt’,

March to September 2003. (6) The Munich

Ottoman carpet in Mamluk format. 131 x

192cm. Private collection, Munich. For m -

erly: Ostler, Munich. Published: Denny

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

ringed by palmettes carpet. 150 x 266cm.

Whereabouts unknown. Formerly: Bern -

heimer Collection, Munich, acquired 1921.

Published: Christie’s, London, 14 February

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

sis). (8) The Bernheimer rows of flowers

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

lection, Germany. Formerly: Otto Bern -

heimer Collection, Munich (until 1961).

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

65 Thompson 2006, p.164, note 148.

Some authors have erroneously reversed

the order of the groups (Mackie 1983,

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

suggesting that the more simplified ver -

sions are the earliest. This does not make

sense, because several of the rugs with

simpler designs and only three colours

relate through their border patterns and

colours to the rugs with Ottoman designs

that continued to be made in the same

work shops as the Mamluk-style rugs in

the second half of the 16th century.

66 Housego 1986.

67 Thompson 1980.

68 Suriano 2004, p.96.

69 Ellis 1967, pp.2–20.

70 The oldest illustration of what may be

a Mamluk rug is in Vittore Carpaccio’s

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

firm identification is not possible.

Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, no.169.

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

The field design appears somewhat

Mamluk in style, but the borders are

unlike those on any surviving carpet.

Mamluk-style carpets from Cairo depic -

ted in European paintings: (1) The Fish -

erman Presenting St Mark’s Ring to the

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

ted circa 1540 (not 1534, as stated con -

tinuously in the carpet literature and else -

where). Galleria dell’Accademia, Venice.

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

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

of the House of Martinegro. Moretto da

Brescia (or school of), before 1543.

Frescos, Palazzo Martinegro-Salva dego,

Brescia. Published: Erdmann 1940, fig.9;

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

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

1983, back endpaper; Thompson 2006,

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

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

Vecelli, ca. 1485–1576). Kunst histor isches

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

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

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

century. Whereabouts unknown. Published:

Hôtel Drouot, Paris, 18 December 1920;

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

rait. Sofonisba Anguis sola (1532–1625),

1560. Formerly: Galerie Raczynski, Berlin.

Published: Les sing 1877, pl.21 (detail).

(6) The Last Sup per. Ambrosius Franken

the Elder (Flanders, 1544–1618). Koninklijk

Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp,

no.136. Published: Philadelphia Museum

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

Pietro Loredan Praying for the End of

Fam ine. Jacopo and/or Domenico Tintor -

etto, probably 1581–84. Palazzo Ducale,

Venice. Published: Erdmann 1930, p.14

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

Doge Mocenigo Praying (Giving Thanks to

the Redeemer/Adoring the Saviour).

Jacopo and/or Domenico Tintoretto, prob -

ably 1581–84. Palazzo Ducale, Venice.

Pub lished: Erdmann 1930, p.14 (cited).

(9) Painting by Tintoretto at the Palazzo

Ducale, Venice [information from Dr A.

Bruschettini, January 2008]. (10) Painting

by Palma Il Giovane. [infor m a tion from Dr

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

of a Lady. Leandro Bassano (Leandro

da Ponte, 1557–1622). Whereabouts

unknown. Published: Soth eby’s, London,

13 December 1978, lot 37; Mills 1981,

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

Hopfer II. Leandro Bassano, ca. 1595.

Whereabouts unknown. For m erly: Fairfax

Murray collection. Pub lished: Murray auc -

tion, Berlin, November 1929; Erdmann

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

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

radini. Leandro Bassano.Museo Civico,

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

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

17th century? Duke of Fife. Pub lished:

Beattie 1964, p.7, fig.3; Philadel phia Mus -

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

of the Family of Grand Duke Leopold I of

Tuscany. Johann Zoffany, dated 1777.

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna,

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

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

72 The Vienna three-medallion silk Mamluk

carpet. 290 x 540cm. Österreichisches

Museum für angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

no.T8332. Formerly: Habsburg Imperial

collection, Vienna. Published: Riegl 1891,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

stahl 1925, p.159; Sarre and Trenkwald

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

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

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

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

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

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

structure analysis); Erdmann 1940, p.66

(cited); Museum für Angewandte Kunst

1951, pls.40–41; Mazzini 1952, p.333

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Museum of Art 1973, p.194 (cited); Ellis

1974, p.36 (cited); Erdmann 1975, pl.II;

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

(cited); Tolomeo 1979, pl.XIV (detail); Cur a -

tola 1981, no.32 (detail); Denny 1982,

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

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

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

Housego 1986, p.239 (cited, with struct -

ure analy sis); De Unger 1986 (with struct -

ure ana lysis); Gantzhorn 1991, pp.155,

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

with struc ture analysis); Venice 1991, p.35

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

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

Noever 1995, p.122, fig.123; Cura tola 1996,

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

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

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

für Angewandte Kunst 2001, pp.42–5,

figs.43, 45 (with structure ana ly sis); Mallary

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

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

structure analysis). Exhib ited: Munich 1910;

Vienna, Museum für angewandte Kunst,

‘Symmetric and Asymmetric Knots: Ori en -

tal Knotted Carpets from the MAK Collec t -

ion’, 11 December 2002 to 23 March 2003.

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

74 Seven first-period, ten-second period

and 14 third-period. The exact number is

difficult to determine because several are

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 89

incomplete. To date only one sur viv ing

Mamluk with five large medallions is

known, the Faenza-Simonetti carpet in

the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

York. It is possible that some of the sur -

viving fragments, including many of the

first-period examples, may have come

from carpets with three or even five large

medallions. Almost half of the three- and

five-medallion carpets can be traced back

to Italian collections.

75 Three Mamluk-style rugs with direc t -

ional designs: (1) The Bernheimer trees

carpet. 163 x 226cm. Bruschettini Foun d -

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

heimer Collection, Munich, no.56180 158/

225; Elio Cittone, Milan. Published: Bern -

heimer 1959, pl 4; Schürmann [1960],

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

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

(2) The Bode keyhole niche rug with

cloudbands. 120 x 162cm, wool pile on a

wool foundation. Museum of Islamic Art,

Berlin, inv. no.KGM 1888.30. Formerly:

Wilhelm Bode; Kunstgewerbemuseum,

Berlin. Published: Erdmann 1940, p.75,

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

note 7 (with structure analysis); Ellis

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

structure analysis); Washington DC 1974,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

no.E1. Exhibited: London 1983; Berlin

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

curtain. 109 x 138cm, wool pile on a

wool foundation. Padua Synagogue,

Padua. Published: Mitteilungen 1900,

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

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

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

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

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

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

1990, no.119, pp.208–9; Venice 1993,

pp.327–9, no.192; Papotti 1993, p.69;

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

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

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

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

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

323–4, cat. 82; Pordenone 2007, p.71.

Inscribed with Verse 20 of Psalm 118:

“This is the Gate of the Lord through

which the righteous shall enter”.

76 Riefstahl 1925, pp.159–62.

77 See note 64, nos.1–4.

78 The Arhan Mamluk carpet. 251 x

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

Arhan, Istanbul; Arhan family collection,

Stockholm; Wher Collection; The Textile

Gallery, London. Published: Whiting 1981,

p.55.

79Whiting 1981, p.55.

80 Three circular Mamluk carpets:

(1) The Barbieri circular Mamluk carpet.

284 x 292cm. Bruschettini Foundation,

Genoa, no.T48. Formerly: Piero Barbieri

Collection, Genoa. Published: Erdmann

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

p.198, fig.252; Sotheby’s, London, 12

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

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

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

no.94; Okumura 2007, pp.166–7, no.40;

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

1983. (2) The Olmutz circular Mamluk

carpet. Diameter 270cm. Kremsier Castle,

Czech Republic. Formerly: Collection of

the Archbishops of Olmutz. Published:

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

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

Mamluk carpet. 278 x 226cm. MIAQ,

no.TE07. Formerly: Louise Michael,

Milan; The Textile Gallery, London.

81 The Clark circular Cairene Ottoman

carpet. 262 x 224cm. Corcoran Gallery of

Art, Washington DC, W.A Clark Collect -

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

Erdmann 1970, p.198 (cited); Bennett

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

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

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

Washington DC, Arthur M. Sackler Gallery,

‘The World at Our Feet. A Selection of

Carpets from the Corcoran Gallery of

Art’, 4 April to 6 July 2003.

82 Diameter 291cm. Boralevi’s lecture at

the HALI Fair 2006 and private communi-

cation. The inventory is to be published

in Spallanzani [i.p.].

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

Erdmann took the reference from

‘Urkunden und Regesten aus der K.K.

Hofbibliothek’, in Jahrbuch der Kunst -

histonschen Sammlungen des Aller -

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

entry no.288: “Two beautiful Algerian

carpets, that [an important military man,

equivalent to a general] from Genova

‘handed over’, with several colours and

yellow woollen fringe, for a round table.”

84 There is a slight chance that the

Barbieri carpet is the one mentioned in

the 1587 Medici archive, and that the

carpet in Kremsier may be one of Ferdi -

nand’s, also originally from the Medici.

Marco Spallanzani’s article ‘Carpets at

the Medici Court in the second half of

the sixteenth century’, to be published in

the forthcoming Islamic Art (Bruschettini

Foundation, Genoa). Spallanzani notes

that: “Francesco I …inventory of 1587…

passed to the Grand Duke Ferdinand,

refers to ‘Un tappeto tondo, cairino, di

diametro di br.5’ [290cm].”

85 Two ‘study piece’ Mamluk carpets in

the MIAQ: (1) The Bernheimer Mamluk

car pet with medallion and bands of cyp -

ress and palm trees. 137 x 204cm.

MIAQ, no.CA04. Formerly: Bernheimer

Collection, Munich, acquired 1911. Pub -

lished: Christie’s, London, 14 February

1996, p.109, lot 103 (with structure

analysis). (2) Mamluk carpet fragment.

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

Published: Lefevre, London, 31 October

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

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

April 1998, lot 24a.

86 Textile Museum 1957, p.41. The inv en -

tories Kühnel refers to are quoted by

Erdmann 1938. For the information on

the 1688 Commercial Register, Kühnel

refers to Erdmann 1938, p.198. The

statements relating to the mosques are

from 1573 and about 1650 – Kühnel here

refers to Erdmann 1938, p.193.

87 Kühnel (Textile Museum 1957, p.57,

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

no.5.

88 Kühnel (Textile Museum 1957, p.57,

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

no.17.

89 By 1585, Cairo had been part of the

Ottoman Empire for more than sixty

years. The Sultan in Istanbul controlled

the activities of the crafts guilds of his

Empire wher ever they were based, and

would have had no need to bring weav -

ers to Istanbul. However, in 1582, on the

occasion of the circumcision of his son,

a grand festival was organised for Sultan

Murad III at the Hippodrome in Istanbul.

The festival included musicians, dancers,

tight rope walkers and all the guilds of

the Empire. Floats pas sed before the

Sultan, while the guilds demon strated

their skills before dignitaries from all over

the world and many thousands of

spectators. There is no specific record of

car pet weavers at this festival, but I refer

to it to demonstrate that the Sultan was

inter ested in the work of the craftsmen

of his Empire. It is quite possible that

the finest carpet weavers in the Empire,

those in Cairo, were brought to the cap -

ital to present their work to the Sultan at

a later date, and that the document citing

the eleven rug masters refers to such a

visit – there seems to be no evidence

that they stayed in Istanbul or anywhere

else in the region for any length of time.

90 Martin 1908. Yet, when discussing the

very fine blue-ground Cairene Otto man

carpet in the Musée des Arts Déco r atifs,

Paris, he states that: ‘not only large

carpets were made, but also prayer car -

pets, of which some fine examples are

in different collections...some have simple

uncoloured prayer niches, others are richly

decorated. As these carpets form of them -

selves a separate group in design and

technique widely different from all other

carpets made at the same time in Asia

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

Sarre believed that these carpets were

made in Damascus. This only adds to the

confusion in the first writings on the

early history of carpets.

91 Erdmann 1960/1962, figs.138, 139

and pl.VII; Bennett 1978, pp.117–20;

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

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

ents of the Bursa/Istanbul theory also

seem to have overlooked other pertinent

evidence. For example, although Kühnel

points out Erdmann’s interesting discov -

ery that “an inventory of the Saray in

Istanbul, dated 1680, mentions twenty

silk prayer carpets from Egypt” (Textile

Museum 1957, p.42, quoting from Erd -

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

examine it more closely. The shininess of

Egyptian wool is deceptive: it looks very

different to Turkish wool and is often

mistaken for silk. Furthermore, rugs with

silk fringes were often called ‘silk rugs’. It

is possible, therefore, that the Otto man

niche rugs in the Topkapı Saray Museum

and the Museum of Turkish and Islamic

Arts, Istanbul, are the last two survivors

of the twenty.

92 As far as I know, both silk and cotton

can be spun in either direction. S-spun

silk tends to pre-date Z-spun in European

silks; the cotton used on Egyptian carpets

was presumably produced locally, and

the reels of spun silk were imported,

gen erally from Iran.

93 Pinner and Franses 1981. The fact that

some Cairene Ottoman rugs have silk

warps, wool wefts and some cotton pile

was not addressed.

94 The Medici Ottoman carpet. 330 x

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

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

structure analysis); London 1983, p.41

and pp.83–5, no.56; Boralevi 1986,

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

unused condition and appears as new,

with bright and gaudy colours.

95 Boralevi 1983, p.282: ‘Tappeto grande

Cairno buono lungo b17 et largo b.5 e

2/3, avuto dal Gen. Cav Da Verrazzano

Commissario delle Galere addi 31 luglio’.

The cited size exactly matches that of

the actual carpet.

96Whiting 1981, p.55, found that the

red of all five Mamluks in the Victoria

and Albert Museum, London, had been

dyed with lac. The red of a Mamluk

carpet in the Wher Collection had been

dyed with cochineal. The Wher carpet

has a minor guard border with the

çintamani design normally associated

with the Ottoman period. Whiting (p.56)

tells us that: “all three of the main

species of insect dye were theoretically

available for use in these carpets:

kermes from Spain, lac from India and

genuine ‘cochineal’ from Mexico’. ...

Cochineal, even when it had become

familiar in Europe, was a very valuable

commodity, and the earliest ship ments

beginning in 1530, would have aroused

extreme interest in Spain... Böh mer has

reported that little or no use of cochineal

or other insect dyes occurred in Turkish

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

90 HALI ISSUE 157

villages before 1850 when cul ti va tion

began in the Mediterranean region.”

97 Whiting 1981, pp.55–6.

98 See note 64, no.6.

99 The Hackwood Park Cairene Ottoman

medallion carpet. 281 x 517cm. MIAQ,

no.CA05. Formerly: Lord Camrose Col -

lec t ion, Hackwood House, Hampshire.

Published: Christie’s, Hackwood House,

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

p.123.

100 The Bernheimer Cairene Ottoman

medallion rug. 132 x 191cm. MIAQ,

no.CA63. Formerly: Consul Otto Bern -

heimer, Munich, acquired 1919; Bern -

heimer family collection, Munich; private

collection. Published: Hamburg 1950,

no.9, pp.22–3, pl.8; Erdmann 1955,

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

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

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

29 April 2004, lot 101.

101 King 1985, pp.49–52.

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

fourteen compartment design carpets can

be identified in the inventories of Car dinal

Wolsey, Margaret of Austria, Archduchess

Margarethe of Mechelen, King Henry VIII

of England, Anna von Ungarn and Arch -

duke Ferdinand II, as well as in Haram

and Florentine documents.

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

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

2006, p.152, fig.146.

105 Twelve of these appear in paintings

by just two artists and may represent

only two examples: (1) Simon Kick, Self

Portait, 1645–1650. National Gallery of

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

lini (1603–1681), Self Portrait. Publis hed:

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

see also p.155, note 138.

106 Para-Mamluk carpets: (1) The Divrigi

domes and squinches carpet. 185 x

195cm, incomplete. Vakıflar Museum,

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

Divrigi. Published: Ellis 1967; Vakıflar

Mus eum 1988, pp.40–45, 9, 180–1, pl.2

(with structure analysis); Philadelphia

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

1986; Franses and Bennett 1988, p.37;

Thompson 2006, p.39, fig.2, pp.146–7,

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

carpet. 230 x 380cm, incomplete. Vakıflar

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

Ulu Mosque, Divrigi. Published: Ellis 1967,

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

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

ure analysis); Thompson 2006, p.146,

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

octagons rug. 125 x 178cm. Philadelphia

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

Williams Memorial Collection, Philadelphia.

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

Erdmann 1930, fig.8; Erdmann 1961,

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

note 33 (cited); Metropolitan Museum of

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exhibited: New York 1910; London 1983.

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

141 x 207cm. Tabibnia Collection, Milan.

Formerly: Private collection, Paris; Vigo

Art Galleries, London; Charles Grant Ellis

Collection, Kingston, NY; Wher Col lec t ion.

Published: Washington DC 1973, fig.24;

Foster 1979, pl.V; Pinner and Fran ses

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

Philadelphia Museum of Art 1988, p.6,

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

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

pl.12 (with structure analysis). Exhibited:

Washington DC 1973; Paris, Institut du

Monde Arabe, 1989–1994; Milan 2006.

Carbon-14 dated 1460–1640 (95% con fi -

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

octagons carpet. 112 x 116cm, incomp -

lete. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

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

tion, Munich. Published: Bernheimer

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

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

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

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

structure analysis); Pinner and Franses

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

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

(6) The Blum medallions and lattice carpet.

255 x 285cm. Bruschettini Foundation,

Genoa. Formerly: Mrs Harry Blum, USA;

The Textile Gallery, London. Published:

Sotheby’s, New York, 1 May 1982, lot

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

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

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

tile Museum, Washington DC, no.R7.21

(R34.32.1). Formerly: Rhode Island School

of Design (1953, by exch ange); George

Hewitt Myers, Washing ton DC. Published:

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

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

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

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

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

lions carpet. 232 x 302cm, incom plete.

Brus ch ettini Foundation, Genoa, no.T38.

For m erly: Michele Campana, Milan. Pub -

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

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

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

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

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

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

44.5 x 40.5cm, oval fragment. Kunst -

gewerbe Museum, Dresden, no.343.

Pub lished: Lessing, 1887; HALI 71, 1993,

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

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

1993. (10) The Konya rug. Small frag ment,

framed with a Beyshehir fragment and

several others. Ethnographic Museum,

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

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

(‘symmetrically knotted’).(11) The Dus sel -

dorf medallion lattice rug.Whereabouts

unknown. Formerly: City art collection,

Dusseldorf. Published: Thompson 2006,

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

carpet. Museum of Islamic Art, Cairo.

Published: Moustapha 1949; Thompson

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

(13) The Cairo compartment design car pet.

Museum of Islamic Art, Cairo. Published:

Bode and Kühnel 1955, p.76, fig.55.

(14) The Chihil Sultun niche rug with Kufic

inscription. 105 x 141cm. Carpet Museum,

Tehran. Formerly: Chihil Sutun Kiosk,

Esfahan. Published: Erdmann 1966,

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

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

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

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

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

fig.116. Inscription reads “Hasten to

repent before death”.

107 Eskenazi 1986 wrote that the Domes

and Squinches rug could have been made

for the opening of the Divrigi Mosque

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

carpet copying earlier architect ural orna -

ment. I find it unlikely that a rug with such

a pattern would have been made for the

mosque. We know of the Safavid Shah

Tahmasp’s gift to the congregation of the

Süleyman Mosque in Istanbul of a multi-

niche prayer carpet (saf), and of the saf

carpets made in Ushak by order of Sultan

Selim II in the early 1570s for the Edirne

Mosque. But a two-octagon rug is a less

likely gift or commission. Most of the rugs

preserved in mosques were given by the

congregation, occasionally from the estate

and in memory of a deceased parent. This

suggests that many of the rugs found in

mosques may have been at least a gen -

eration old at the time of their bequest.

108 Para-Mamluk carpets depicted in

European paintings (in date order):

(1) Mark Enthroned with Saints. Giovanni

Martini da Udine, 1501. The Cathedral,

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

(2) Altarpiece. Lorenzo Lotto, 1505. Church

of Santa Christina al Tivarone, Treviso.

(3) The Doge Loredan and Four Advisors.

Giovanni Bellini (ca. 1430–1516), dated

1507. Gemäldegalerie, Berlin. Published:

Nemes, Munich, 16 June 1931; Mills

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

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

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

the Amazons. Vittore Carpaccio, 1517.

Musée Jacquemart André, Paris. Pub -

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

(5) The Prothonotary Apostolic, Giovanni

Giuliano. Lorenzo Lotto, 1519–20 or after

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

Published: Erdmann 1940, fig.8; Mills

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

Man’s Feast, or Dives Feasting. Boni fazio

Veronese (Bonifazio di Pitati, 1487– 1553),

first half 16th century. Galleria dell’Acc ad -

emia, Venice, cat. 326, no.291. Pub lished:

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

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

Bonifazio Veronese, first half 16th century.

National Museum, Stock holm. Published:

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

of a Man. Francesco Beccar uzzi, first

half 16th century. Gal leria degli Uffizi,

Florence, no.908. Pub lished: Mills 1981,

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

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

Alms. Lotto Lorenzo, 1542. Church of

Santi Giovanni e Paolo, Venice. Pub lished:

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

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

Senator. Sofonisba Anguissola (ca. 1535

–1626). Burghley House Collection, Stam -

ford. Published: HALI 94, 1997, p.61;

Thompson 2006, p.134, fig.113. (11)

Lucia, Minerva and Europa Anguis sola

Playing Chess. Sofonisba Anguissola,

1555. Muzeum Narodowe, Poznan.

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

(12) The Virgin with Angelic Musicians.

Unknown Flemish artist, probably mid-

16th century. Museo Arqueológico

Nacional, Madrid, no.51967. Published:

Thompson 2006, p.143, fig.127.

109 Thompson (2006, p.149) mentions

the ‘Munich’ and ‘Wind’ car pets as

examples of the ‘international’ style.

They have some simil arities in design to

the para-Mamluks, but their technique

and colours seem to place them with

rugs attributed to west Anatolia.

110 Thompson has spent many years

studying Turkmen rugs from west

Turkestan and has written possibly the

finest book on this subject (Mackie and

Thompson 1980).

111 I am very uncomfortable with the

idea that these rugs were ever part of

the Turkmen design tradition from Iran.

However, it is easy to see a connection

between the ivory-ground ‘Seljuk’ car -

pets possibly from Konya and the Turk -

men tradition, and there is a clear link

between Iranian paintings of the 15th

century and the so-called ‘small-pattern

Holbein’ carpets of western Anatolia. To

connect para-Mamluk rugs to Iran through

the use of an open ‘Kufesque’ and inter -

lace border is problematic when the pat -

tern was part of an international style

that stretched from west Anatolia to India

in the late 14th and early 15th centuries.

112 The term ‘compartment’ (and the

earlier ‘che querboard’) was coined by

Ernst Kühnel.

113 Some carpets with other Syrian

designs: (1) The Istanbul three-medallion

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

ish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, nos 844-

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

Ölçer et al. 1996, pp.118–21, pl.86;

Thom pson 2006, p.155, fig.149; Istanbul

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

three-medallion carpet 2. 292 x 765cm.


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

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 91

(six pieces). Published: Museum of

Turk ish and Islamic Arts 1999, pl.1;

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

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

cloudband carpet. 163 x 411cm.

Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin,

no.86.601. Published: Zick-Nissen 1966,

p.111, fig.9; Museum für Islamische

Kunst 1971/1979, no.583; Museum of

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

(4) Single-niche fragments from a saf.

(a) 69 x 60cm. Wher Collec tion.

Formerly: Garry Muse, Tucson; The

Textile Gallery, London. Published: HALI

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

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

dore palmettes carpet. 82 x 74cm and 83

x 54cm, two fragments. Keir Collect ion,

Ham. Formerly: Salvadore, Florence.

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

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

(6) The Salvadore eight-pointed star med -

al lion carpet. 180 x 150cm, incomplete.

Keir Collection, Ham. Formerly: Salvadore,

Florence. Published: Keir Collection 1978,

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

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

som carpet. 126 x 343cm. Metro politan

Museum of Art, New York, no.1990.169.

Formerly: Marshall & Marilyn R. Wolf,

New York. Published: Bulletin of the

Metropolitan Museum, New York, Fall

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

lattice carpet. 228 x 383cm. Vakıflar

Museum, Istanbul, no.A-172. For merly:

Ulu Mosque, Divrigi. Published: Vak ıflar

Museum 1998, pp.124–31, 292–3, pl.58

(with structure analysis).(9) The Div rigi

palmettes and cloudbands rug. 200 x

293cm. Vakıflar Museum, Istan bul,

no.A-216. Formerly: Ulu Mosque, Divrigi.

Published: Vakıflar Museum 1998,

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

analysis). (10) The Muse cartouche border

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

no TE14. Form erly: Garry Muse, Tuscson;

The Textile Gallery, London; Wher Col -

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

Thompson 2006, p.156, fig.152.

(11) The New York palmette and blossom

carpet. 198 x 310cm. Eberhart Herrmann,

Emmet ten. Published: HALI 69, 1993,

p.68; Soth eby’s, New York, 15 December

1994, lot 92; Munich 1997, pl.28 (with

structure analysis).

Two Anatolian rugs in a Damascus style:

(1) The Divrigi eight-pointed star medal -

lion and four octagons carpet. 236 x

362cm. Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul,




analysis). (2) The Divrigi leaf lattice rug.

150 x 290cm. Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul,




analysis).

Adams, Philip R., ‘A Panorama of Spanish

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

April 1971.

Alexander Collection, Berkeley, A Fore -

shadowing of 21st Century Art, text

by Christopher Alexander, OUP, New

York/London, 1993.

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

Rawd al-Mitar: La Péninsule Ibérique

au Moyen-Âge, edited and translated

by E. Lévi-Provencal, Leyden, 1938.

American Art Association, New York, Cata -

logue of the Celebrated Collection of...

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

auction catalogue, 8 to 10 April 1920.

American Art Association/Anderson

Galleries, New York, Rare Ancient

Rugs, The V. & L. Benguiat Collection,

auction catalogue, 23 April 1932.

[Anon], Turkish Handwoven Carpets,

Catalogue No: 2, selected by Dogan

Yilmazkaya, Sahika Ünal and Güran

Erbek, Turkish Republic, Ministry of

State & Ministry of Culture and

Tourism, Ankara, January 1988.

Arcangeli, Catherina Schmidt, ‘“Orientalist”

Painting in Venice, 15th–17th Cent -

uries’, in Venice and the Islamic World,

828–1797, pp.121–39, edited by

Stefano Carboni, New York, 2006.

Aslanapa, Oktay, Turkish Arts, translated

by Herman Kreider, Dogan Kardes,

Istanbul, 1961.

Aslanapa, Oktay, Turkish Art and Archi tec -

ture, Faber and Faber, London, 1971.

Aslanapa, Oktay, One Thousand Years of

Turkish Carpets, Eren, Istanbul, 1988.

Atıl, Esin (ed), Turkish Art, Washington

DC, 1980.

Beattie, May H., ‘Britain and the Oriental

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

pp.4–15, 1964.

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

Spain. An Analysis and Classification

of Their Field Designs’, in Oriental Car -

pet & Textile Studies II: Carpets of

the Mediterranean Countries 1400–

1600, pp.271–89, dited by Robert

Pinner and Walter B. Denny, HALI/

OCTS, London, 1986.

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

the World, Ferndale Editions, London,

1978.

Bennett, Ian, ‘Splendours in the City of

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

pp.124–7, with additional captions by

Kurt Erdmann, 1987.

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

The Alexander Collection: Part II’, in

HALI 74, pp.86–95, April/May 1994.

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

World, Greenwich Editions, London,

2004.

Berlin, Museum für Islamische Kunst,

Islamische Kunst, exhibition cata -

logue, 1967, Staaliche Museen Preus -

sischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, 1967.

Berlin, Museum für Islamische Kunst,

Wilhelm von Bode und die Berliner

Teppichsammlung, exhibition cata -

logue, 18 October 1995, text by

Volkmar Enderlein, Bildheft der

Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin –

Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Heft 84,

Gebr. Mann Verlag, Berlin, 1995.

Beselin, Annette, ‘Bode auf den zweiten

Blick’, in Islamische Kunst in Berliner

Sammlungen – 100 Jahre Museum

für Islamische Kunst in Berlin,

pp.66–71, edited by Jens Kröger and

D. Heiden, Berlin, 2005.

Bernheimer, Otto, Alte Teppiche des 16.

bis 18. Jahrhunderts der Firma L.

Bernheimer, Munich, 1959.

Bier, Carol, ‘Beyond the Pyramids’,

review of the exhibition ‘Beyond the

Pyramids: Geometry & Design in

Mamluk & Ottoman Carpets’, at The

Textile Museum, Washington DC, 1

June 1991 to February 1992, in HALI

57, pp.123–5, June 1991.

Bier, Carol, ‘Elements of Plane Symmetry

in Oriental Carpets’, in Textile Museum

Journal, vol.31, pp.53–70, 1992.

Bier, Carol, ‘Approaches to Understanding

Oriental Carpets’, in Arts of Asia,

vol.26, no.1, pp.66–81, 1996(1).

Bier, Carol, ‘Symmetry and Pattern: Art

of Oriental Carpets’, in Arts & The

Islamic World, no.29, pp 37–40,

Autumn 1996(2).

Bier, Carol, ‘Andalusian Harmony’, in

HALI, 127, pp.42–3, 2003(1).

Bier, Carol, ‘Jewels of the Textile Mus -

eum’s Collection. I. Mamluk Rugs

from Egypt’, in A World of Oriental

Carpets & Textiles, edited by Murray

L. Eiland, Jr., catalogue of exhibitions

at the Xth International Conference on

Oriental Carpets, 17–21 April 2003,

pp.1–16, 282, 10th ICOC, Washing ton

DC, 2003(2).

Bier, Carol, ‘Spanish and Mamluk Carpets.

Comparisons of Decoration and

Struc ture’, in Ghereh, 36, pp.9–17,

2004.

Black, David (ed.), World Rugs and Ca r -

pets, Feltham, Middlesex, 1985.

Bode, Wilhelm, ‘Ein Altpersischer Teppich

im Besitz der Königlichen Museen zu

Berlin, Studien zur Geschichte der

Westasiatischen Knüpfteppiche’ in

Jahrbuch der Kgl. Preuszischen

Kunstsammlunger, XIII, pp.26–49,

108–37, Berlin, 1892.

Bode, Wilhelm, Vorderasiatische Knüpf -

teppiche aus Älterer Zeit, Seemann,

Leipzig, 1901.

Bode, Wilhelm von, and Ernst Kühnel,

Vorderasiatische Knüpfteppiche aus

Älterer Zeit, 2nd edition, Leipzig,

1914.

Bode, Wilhelm von and Ernst Kühnel,


Älterer Zeit, 3rd edition, Klinkhardt &

Biermann, Leipzig, 1922.



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

hardt & Biermann, Braunschweig,

1955.


Antique Rugs from the Near East,

4th ed., translated by Charles Grant

Ellis, London, 1958.

Bode, Wilhem von and Ernst Kühnel,


translated by Charles Grant Ellis, 4th

edition, revised, Bell & Sons, London,

1970.

Bode, Wilhem von, and Ernst Kühnel,


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

Great Carpets, The Cairene Carpets

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

1983.

Boralevi, Alberto, ‘Un tappeto ebraico

italo-egizano’, in Critica d’Arte, XLIX,

no.2, July to September 1984.

Boralevi, Alberto, ‘Three Egyptian Carpets

in Italy’, in Oriental Carpet & Textile

Studies II: Carpets of the Mediter -

ranean Countries 1400– 1600,

pp.205–20, edited by Robert Pinner

and Walter B. Denny, HALI/OCTS,

London, 1986.

Boralevi, Alberto, ‘Two of a Kind’, in

HALI, 103, p.79, March/April 1999.

Bösch, Marion, Mamlukenteppiche.

Probleme der Teppichforschung am

Beispiel einer Gruppe des 15. bis 16.

Jahrhunderts aus dem östlichen

Mittelmeerraum, Karl-Franzens

Univer sität Graz, Institut für Kunst -

geschichte, 1991 (Doctoral thesis).

Bösch, Marion, ‘Mamluk Carpets – Typ -

ology and Dating’, in 7th International

Conference on Oriental Carpets,

Papers, Presentations, pp.79–92,

Academic Committee of the 7th

ICOC, Düsseldorf, 1996.

Bunt, Cyril G.E., Hispano-Moresque

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

Camman, Schuyler, V.R., ‘Symbolic Mean i -

ngs in Oriental Rug Patterns: Parts

I–III’, inTextile Museum Journal, vol.III,

no.3, pp.5–55, December 1972.

Campana, P. Michele, European Carpets,

Paul Hamlyn, London, 1969.

Cavallo, Adolph, ‘The Splendour Falls on

Castle Walls’, in Museum of Fine

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

pp.63–82, Boston, 1962.

Collins, Sheridan Pressey, ‘The Spanish

Connection’, in HALI, 38, pp.42–4,

1988.

Curatola, Giovanni, Tappeti, Milan, 1981.

Curatola, Giovanni, ‘Four Carpets in Venice’,

in Oriental Carpet & Textile Studies II:

Carpets of the Mediter ranean

WORKS CITED

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

92 HALI ISSUE 157

Countries 1400–1600, pp.123–30,

edited by Robert Pinner and Walter

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

Curatola, Giovanni, ‘Il commercio dei tap -

peti a Firenze nell’Ottocento: appunti

sugli antiquari Bardini’, in La Cono -

scenza dell’Asia e dell’Africa in Italia

nei Secoli XVIII e XIX, vol.III, t.I,

pp.248–60, Naples, 1989.

Curatola, Giovanni, ‘Islamic Art, (b) Medi -

terranean Lands’, in The Dictionary of

Art, edited by Jane Turner, vol.16,

pp.472–4, London, 1996.

Day, Susan, ‘“Chinoiserie” in Islamic

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

December 1989.

De Unger, Edmund, ‘Connoisseurs

Choice: The Silk Mamluk’, in HALI,

31, pp.8–9, 1986.

Denny, Walter B., ‘Ten Great Carpets’,

review of the exhibition of the same

title at the Boston Museum of Fine

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

pp.156–64, 1978.

Denny, Walter B., ‘The Origin of the

Designs of Ottoman Court Carpets’,

in HALI, II/1, pp.6–11, Spring 1979.

Denny, Walter B., ‘Türkmen Carpets and

Early Rug Weaving in the Western

Islamic World’, in HALI, 4, 2,

pp.329–37, 1982.

Denny, Walter B., ‘The Origin and

Development of Ottoman Court

Carpets’, in Oriental Carpet and

Textile Studies, II, Carpets of the

Mediterranean Countries 1400–1600,

chapter 20, pp.243–59, HALI/OCTS,

London, 1986.

Denny, Walter B., ‘Oriental Carpets and

Textiles in Venice’, in Venice and the

Islamic World, 828–1797, exhibition

catalogue, 27 March to 8 July 2007,

edited by Stefano Carboni, pp.174–91,

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

York, and Yale University Press, New

Haven, 2007.

Denny, Walter, and David Black, ‘Mamluk

and Ottoman Carpets’, in The Atlas of

Rugs and Carpets, London, 1994.

Dimand, Maurice, ‘Two Fifteenth Century

Hispano-Moresque Rugs’, in Metro -

politan Museum of Art Bulletin,

vol.22, no 10, pp.341–52, June 1964.

Edinburgh, National Museums of Scotland,

Beyond the Palace Walls, Islamic Art

from the State Hermitage Museum,

exhibition catalogue, 14 July to 5

November 2006, edited by Mikhail B.

Piotrovsky and Anton D. Pritula,

NMS, Edinburgh, 2006.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘A Soumak Woven

Rug in a 15th Century International

Style’, in Textile Museum Journal,

vol.1, no.2, Washington DC, 1963.

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

Rugs’, in Textile Museum Journal,

vol.I, no.4, pp.5–22, Washington DC,

December 1969.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Is the Mamluk

Carpet a Mandala?’, in Textile

Museum Journal, vol.IV, no.1,

pp.30–50, Washington DC, 1974.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Carpet Collections

of the Philadelphia Museum of Art’,

in Textile Museum Journal, vol.17,

pp.29–44, Washington DC, 1978.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘Mamluk Rug Exhib -

ition’, review of an exhibition at The

Textile Museum, Washington DC, 17

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

pp.67–8, 1981.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘The Strengths of

the Textile Museum’s Oriental Carpet

Collection’, in Textile Museum Journal,

24, pp.61–73, 1985.

Ellis, Charles Grant, ‘On “Holbein” and

“Lotto” Rugs’, in Oriental Carpet and

Textile Studies, Volume II, Carpets of

the Mediterranean Countries

1400–1600, pp.163–87, edited by

Robert Pinner and Walter B. Denny,

HALI/OCTS, London, 1986.

Enderlein, Volkmar, ‘Zwei Ägyptische

Gebetsteppiche im Islamischen

Museum’, in Forschungen und

Berichte, Staatliche Museen zu

Berlin, vol.XIII, pp.7–15, 1971.

Enderlein, Volkmar, ‘Zwei Kleinasiatische

Teppiche mit Rankenmusterung’, in

Forschungen und Berichte, Staatliche

Museen zu Berlin, Band 19, 1979.

Enderlein, Volkmar, Wegleitung Islam -

isches Museum, Staatliche Museen

zu Berlin, 1988.

Enderlein, Volkmar, ‘Bode’s Legacy:

Wilhelm von Bode & The Berlin

Carpet Collection’, in HALI, 69,

pp.84–95, June–July 1993.

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Some Observations on

the So-Called “Damascus Rugs”’, in

Art in America, vol.XIX, pp.3–22, 1930.

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Kairener Teppiche I.

Europäische und Islamische Quellen

des 15. bis 18. Jahrhunderts’, in Ars

Islamica, vol.V, pp.179–206, 1938(1).

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Kairener Teppiche II.

Mamluken- und Osmanenteppiche’, in

Ars Islamica, vol.VII, pp.55–81, 1940.

Erdmann, Kurt, Der Orientalische Knüpf -

teppich, Tübingen, 1955.

Erdmann, Kurt, review of ‘Arazzi e Tappeti

Antichi. Mercedes e Vittorio Viale...

Rezension’, in Ars Orientalis, II,

pp.571–89, 1957.

Erdmann, Kurt, Oriental Carpets, New

York and London, 1960.

Erdmann, Kurt, ‘Neuere Untersuchungen

zur Frage der Kairener Teppiche’, in

Ars Orientalis, vol.4, pp.65–105, 1961.

Erdmann, Kurt, Europa und der Orient tep -

pich, Florian Kupferberg, Mainz, 1962.

Erdmann, Kurt, Siebenhundert Jahre

Orientteppiche, Herford, 1966.

Erdmann, Kurt, Seven Hundred Years of

Oriental Carpets, Faber and Faber,

London, 1970.

Erdmann, Kurt, Oriental Carpets, An

Account of their History, translated

by Charles Grant Ellis, Zwemmer,

London, 1975.

Eskenazi, John, L’Arte del Tappeto

Orientale, Milan, 1983.

Essen, Villa Hügel, 5000 Jähre

ägyptische Kunst, exhibition

catalogue, Essen, 1961.

Faraday, Cornelia Bateman, ‘Early

Spanish Rugs’, in Good Furniture

Magazine, vol.XXVIII, pp.7–12,

1927(1).

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.

Faraday, Cornelia Bateman, European

and American Carpets and Rugs,

Antique Collectors’ Club, Wood -

bridge, 1990.

Farnham, Thomas J., ‘Bardini, Classical

Carpets, and America’, in HALI, 119,

pp.74–85, November–December 2001.

Felton, Anton, ‘Jewish Carpets, A Brief

History’, in Ghereh, no.12, pp.7–19,

1997.

Ferrandis Torres, José, ‘Alfombras hispano-

moriscas “tipo Holbein”’, in Archivo

Espanol de Arte, L, pp.103–11,

March–April 1942.

Ferrara, Italya, Arte ebraica in Italia,

exhibition catalogue, edited by V.B.

Mann, Mondadori, Milano, 1990.

Field, D.M., Les Plus Beaux Tapis du

Monde, Geneva, 1983.

Florence, The Carpet Studio, The Carpet

Studio di Alberto Boralevi, exhibition

catalogue, October to November

1996, text by Maurizio Cohen and

Alberto Boralevi, Il Tappeto Parlante,

Rome, 1996.

Florence, Fortezza da Basso, Oriental

Geometries, Stefano Bardini and the

Antique Carpet, exhibition catalogue,

edited by Alberto Boralevi, Sillabe,

Livorno, 1999.

Florence, Pitti Palace, Islam, Specchio

d’Oriente, exhibition catalogue, 23

April to 1 September 2002, edited by

G. Damiani and M. Scalini, Livorno,

2002.

Foster, Olive Bumstead, ‘Rug Society

News: A History of the Hajji Baba

Club’, in HALI, 2/1, pp.54–8, 1979.

Franses, Michael, ‘Fengruan Rutan, Silk

Pile Covers from Western China’, in

First Under Heaven, The Art of Asia,

HALI Annual 4, pp.84–107, Hali

Publications, 1997.

Franses, Michael, ‘Some Wool Pile

Persian-Design Niche Rugs’, in

Oriental Carpet and Textile Studies,

vol.V, part 2, pp.36–136, edited by

Murray L. Eiland, Jr., and Robert

Pinner, ICOC, Danville, 1999.

Franses, Michael, and Ian Bennett, ‘The

Vakıflar Carpet Collection’, in HALI,

38, pp.32–41, March/April 1988.

Gamal, Mehrez, ‘As syad al Islami wa

Mushtaqah fi Isbarya [The Islamic

Carpet and its Derivations in Spain]’,

in Majallat al Tari Khiyat al Misriyah,

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,

‘Con stellations 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 -

logue, 22 August to 22 October 1950,

text by Kurt Erdmann, Hamburg, 1950.

Hein, Wilhelm, ‘Der Seidene Sternteppich

aus Ägypten, seine Ornamente und

Perspektive’, in Alte und Moderne

Kunst, XXII, 151, pp.14–21, 1977.

Heinz, Dora, Alte Orientteppiche, Wohn -

kunst und Hausrat/Einst und Jetzt,

vol.24, Darmstadt, 1956.

Heinz, Dora, ‘Die Sammlung Oriental -

ische Teppiche im Österreichischen

Museum für Angewandte Kunst in

Wien’, in Bustan, 3, pp.41–8, 1962.

Hoskins, Nancy Arthur, ‘Textiles’, in

Fustat Finds, Beads, Coins, Medical

Instruments, Textiles and Other Arte -

facts from the Awad Collection,

American University in Cairo Press,

Cairo and New York, 2002.

Housego, Jenny, ‘“Mamluk” Carpets and

North Africa’, in Oriental Carpet and

Textile Studies, Volume II, Carpets of

the Mediterranean Countries 1400–

1600, pp.221–42, HALI/OCTS, London,

1986.

Hubel, Reinhard, The Book of Carpets,

Barrie & Jenkins, London, 1971.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

HALI ISSUE 157 93

ICOC, Programme of the 5th International

Conference on Oriental Carpets,

Vienna and Budapest, 17 to 21

September 1986.

Isaacson, Richard, ‘Mamlukes, Ottomans

and All That’, in Oriental Rug Review,

vol.12, no.1, pp.42–5, October/Nov -

em ber 1991.

Isaacson, Richard, ‘The Admiral & The

Wild Man’, in HALI, 98, pp.78–83,

1998.

Istanbul, Sakip Sabanci Museum, Otto -

man Splendour in Florentine Collect -

ions, From the Medicis to the Savoias,

exhibition catalogue, 21 December

2003 to 21 March 2004, Sakip

Sabanci Museum, Istanbul, 2003.

Istanbul, Sakip Sabanci Museum, In

Praise of God, Anatolian Rugs in

Transylvanian Churches 1500–1750,

exhibition catalogue, 19 April to 19

August 2007, Sakip Sabanci Museum,

Istanbul, 2007(1).

Istanbul, International Conference on

Oriental Carpets, Weaving Heritage

of Anatolia, catalogue of exhibtions

for the 11th ICOC, 19 to 22 April

2007, edited by Hülya Tezcan and

Sumiyo Okumura, 2 vols,, ICOC,

Istanbul, 2007(2).

Keir Collection, Ham, Islamic Carpets

and Textiles in the Keir Collection,

text by Friedrich Spuhler, Faber and

Faber, London, 1978.

Kendrick, A.F., and R. Barnett, in Treasures

of a London Temple, edited by A.G.

Grimwade, London, 1951.

Kendrick, A.F., and C.E.C. Tattersall,

Hand-Woven Carpets, Oriental and

European, 2 vols., Benn Brothers,

London, 1922.

King, Donald, ‘[East Mediterranean Car -

pets in the Victoria & Albert Museum]

The History of the Col lection’, in

HALI, 4/1, pp.36–7, 1981.

King, Donald, ‘The Carpet Collection of

Cardinal Wolsey’, in Oriental Carpet &

Textile Studies, I, pp.41–54,


King, Monique, ‘French Documents

Relating to Oriental Carpets,

15th–16th Century’, in Oriental

Carpet and Textile Studies, Volume II,

Carpets of the Mediterranean Count -

ries 1400– 1600, pp.131–8, edited by

Robert Pinner and Walter B. Denny.


Kühnel, Ernst, ‘Die Entwicklung des

Orient-Teppichs’, in Die Kunstwelt, III,

pp.441–60, 1913/14.

Lamm, Carl Johann, ‘The Marby Rug and

Some Fragments of Carpets Found in

Egypt’, in Svenska Orientsällskapets,

Årsbok 1937, pp.51–130, Bokförlags

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 -

muster nach Bildern und Originalen

des XV.-XVI. Jahrhunderts, Wasmuth,

Berlin, 1877.

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

Centuries, exhibition catalogue, 31

July to 18 November 2007, curated

by Teresa Pacheco Pereira and

Jessica Hallett, MNAA, Lisbon, 2007.

Little, Donald, ‘The Haram Documents as

Sources for the Arts and Architecture

of the Mamluk Period’, in Muqarnas,

2, pp.61–72, 1984.

Little, Donald, ‘Data from the Haram

Documents on Rugs in Late 14th

Century Jerusalem’, in Oriental

Carpet and Textile Studies, Volume II,

Carpets of the Mediterranean

Countries 1400– 1600, pp.83–94,

edited by Robert Pinner and Wlater

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

Little, Donald, ‘In Search of Mamluk

Carpets’, in HALI, 101, pp.68–9,

November 1998.

London, Hayward Gallery, The Eastern

Carpet in the Western World, exhib -

ition catalogue, 20 May to 10 July

1983, text by Donald King, with

essays by John Mills and David

Sylvester, Arts Council of Great

Britain, London, 1983.

Maastricht, MECC, The European Fine

Art Fair, fair handbook, 2002.

Mackie, Louise W., ‘Two Remarkable

Fifteenth Century Carpets from

Spain’, in Textile Museum Journal,

vol.IV, no. 4, pp.15–27, 1977.

Mackie, Louise W., ‘Native and Foreign

Influences in Carpets Woven in Spain

during the 15th Century’, in HALI,

II/2, pp.88–95, Summer 1979.

Mackie, Louise, ‘Woven Status: Mamluk

Silks and Carpets’, in The Muslim

World, vol.LXXIII, nos 3–4, pp.253–61,

July/October 1983.

Mackie, Louise W., and Jon Thompson

(eds.), Turkmen, Tribal Carpets and

Traditions, Textile Museum, Washing -

ton DC, 1980.

Madrid, Sociedad Española de Amigos

del Arte, Exposición de Alfombras

Antiguas Españolas, exhibition cata -

logue, May to June 1933, text by

José Ferrandis Torres, Sociedad

Española de Amigos del Arte,

Madrid, 1933.

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.

Martin, Fredrik R., The History of Oriental

Carpets before 1800, Printing Office

of the Imperial Austrian Court,

Vienna, 1908.

May, Florence Lewis, ‘Hispano-Moresque

Rugs’, in Notes Hispanic V, The

Hispanic Society of America, New

York, 1945.

Mayer, Leo, Saracenic Heraldry, Oxford,

1933.

Mazzini, Ferdinando, Tappeti Orientali,

Tirrenna, Livorno, 1952.

Mellaart, James, Çatal Hüyük, A Neolithic

Town in Anatolia,Thames and Hudson,

1967.

Mellaart, James, Udo Hirsch, and Belkis

Balpinar, The Goddess from Anatolia,

Eskenazi, Milan, 1989.

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,

Handbook of Mohammedan Art, text

by Maurice Dimand, Metropolitan

Museum of Art, New York, 1958.

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,

Oriental Rugs in the Metropolitan

Museum of Art, text by Maurice

Dimand and Jean Mailey, Metro -

politan Museum of Art, New York,

1973.

Migeon, Gaston, Manuel d’Art Musulman,

vol. 2, Arts Plastiques et Industriels,

Paris, 1927.

Milan, Eskenazi Gallery, Il Tappeto Orien -

tale dal XV al XVII secolo, exhibition

catalogue, 21 January to 20 February

1982, text by Michael Franses and

Ian Bennett, Eskenazi, Milan, 1981.

Milan, Galleria Moshe Tabibnia, Tappeti

Classici d’Oriente del XVI e XVII

Secolo, exhibition catalogue, 21

September to 20 November 1999,

Moshe Tabibnia, Milan, 1999.

Milan, Galleria Moshe Tabibnia, Mile -

stones in the History of Carpets,

exhibition catalogue, 14 October to

11 November 2006, text by Jon

Thompson, Moshe Tabibnia, Milan,

2006.

Milanese, Enza, Tappeti, Milan, 1992.

Milanese, Enza, The Carpet. An Illus -

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

“Bellini”, “Keyhole”, or “Re-Entrant”

Rugs’, in HALI, 58, pp.86–103,

August 1991.

Mills, John, ‘The Chihil Sutun “Para-

Mamluk” Prayer Rug’, in HALI, 93,

pp.72–6, July 1997.

Mills, John, ‘Portugal and the Oriental

Carpet’, in HALI, 154, pp.133–4, 2007.

Mitteilungen des Gesellschaft zur

Erforschung Jüdisches Kunstdenk -

mäler, I, Frankfurt, 1900.

Moustapha, Mohamed, Le Musée de

l’Art Arabe au Caire, Cairo, 1949.

Munich, Herrmann, Asiatische Teppich-

und Textilkunst, Band 5, exhibition

catalogue, text by Eberhart Herr -

mann, Herrmann, Munich, 1997.

Munich, Staatlichen Museums für Völk -

erkunde, Old Eastern Carpets,

Master pieces in German Private

Collections/Alte Orientteppiche,

Ausgewähte Stücke deutscher

Privatsammlungen, catalogue of an

exhibition, 23 March to 12 May, text

by Martin Volkmann et al., Callwey,

Munich, 1985.

- Munich, Stadt-Museum, Exposition of

Mussulman Art, exhibition catalogue,

text by Drs Sarre and Martin, Bruck -

mann, Munich, 1910.

Munich, Stadt-Museum, Ausstellung von

Meisterwerken Muhammedanischer

Kunst in München 1910, exhibition

catalogue, edited by Friedrich Sarre

and F.R. Martin, with contributions

from M. van Berchem, M. Dreger,

E. Kühnel, C. List and S. Schröder,

[carpet section entries by Friedrich

Sarre], F. Bruckmann A.G., Munich,

1912.

Murray, Thomas, ‘In Pursuit of a Proto -

type’, in HALI, 112, pp.89–91, Sept -

ember–October 2000.

Museo Nacional de Artes Decorativas,

Madrid, Alfombras Españolas del


text by Alberto Bartolomé Arraiza,

Cristina Partearroyo and Ana Schoebel

Orbea, Thyssen-Bornemisza Found -

ation, Madrid, 1996.


Madrid, Alfombras Españolas de

Alcaraz y Cuenca, Siglos XV–XVI, text

by Alberto Bartolomé Arraiza, Museo

Nacional de Artes Decorativas, Madrid,

2002.

Museum für Angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

Altorientalische Teppiche, exhibition

catalogue, text by Siegfried Troll,

Vienna, 1951.

Museum für Angewandte Kunst, Vienna,

Die Orientalischen Knüpfteppiche im

MAK, text by Angela Völker, MAK,

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.


Istanbul, In Pursuit of Excellence.

Works of Art from the Museum of

Turkish and Islamic Arts, Ahmet

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

Ertug, Istanbul, 1993.


Istanbul, Anatolian Carpets, Master -

pieces from the Museum of Turkish

and Islamic Arts, text by Nazan Ölçer

and Walter B. Denny, 2 vols, Ertug

and Kocabiyik, Bern, 1999.

Neugebauer, Rudolf, and Julius Orendi,

Handbuch der Orientalische Teppich -

kunde, Hiersmanns Handbucher,

vol.IV, Hiersmann, Leipzig, 1923.

Neugebauer, Rudolf, and Siegfried Troll,

Handbuch der Orientalischen Teppich -

kunde, Hiersmann, Leipzig, 1930.

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art,

Catalogue of a Loan Exhibition of

Early Oriental Rugs, exhibition cata -

logue, 1 November 1910 to 15 Jan -

uary 1911, text by Wilhelm Valentiner,


York, 1910.


The James F. Ballard Collection of

Oriental Rugs, exhibition catalogue, 1

October to 31 December 1923, text

by Joseph Breck and Frances Morris,


York, 1923.


Al-Andalus, The Art of Islamic Spain,

exhibition catalogue, 1 July to 27

September 1992, Metropolitan

Museum of Art, New York, 1992.

Noever, Peter, MAK. Österreichisches

Museum für angewandte Kunst Wien,

Vienna, 1995.

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

same name held at the Museum of

Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, 26

September to 12 November 1996,

Ahmet Ertug, Istanbul, 1996.

Pagnano, Gigi, L’Arte del Tappeto Orientale

ed Europeo, dalle origini al XVIII

secolo, Bramante Editrice, Busto

Arsizio, 1983.

Papotti, Luisa, ‘Eredità dell’Islam, Arte

Islamica a Venezia’, in Ghereh, 1/2,

pp.67–73, 1993.

Paris, Institut du Monde Arabe, Tapis,

Present de L’Orient a l’Occident,

exhibition catalogue, text by Roland

Gilles, et al., Institut du Monde Arabe,

Paris, 1989.

Paris, Institut du Monde Arabe, Heaven in

a Carpet, exhibition catalogue, 7

December 2004 to 27 March 2005,

text by Roland Gilles, et al., Institut du

Monde Arabe, Paris, 2004.

Paris, Institut du Monde Arabe, Venise et

l'Orient 828–1797, exhibition cata logue,

3 October 2006 to 18 February 2007,

Gallimard, Paris, 2006.

Petzel, Florence Eloise, Textiles of

Ancient Mesopotamia, Persia and

Egypt, Florence Petzel, USA, 1987.

Philadelphia Museum of Art, Oriental

Carpets in the Philadelphia Museum

of Art, text by Charles Grant Ellis,

University of Pennsylvania Press,

Philadelphia, 1988.

[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

the Mediterranean Countries 1400-

1600, pp.1–11, edited by Robert

Pinner and Walter B. Denny.


Pinner, Robert, and Michael Franses,

Turkoman Studies 1, Oguz Press,

London, 1980.

Pinner, Robert, and Michael Franses, ‘The

East Mediterranean Carpet Collection

[in the Victoria & Albert Museum]’, in

HALI, 4/1, pp.37–52, 1981.

Pordenone, Convent of Saint Francis, De

Mirabilibus Mundi, Viaggio nel Mondo

del tappeto Orientale, exhibition cata -

logue, 1 December 2007 to 27 Jan -

uary 2008, text by Carlo Scara muzza,

esaExpomostre, Pordenone, 2007.

Prato, Museo del Tessuto, Intrecci Medi -

ter ranei, exhibition catalogue, 5 May

to 30 September 2006, text by Giam -

piero Nigro, Marco Spallanzani, Anna

Contadini, Alberto Boralevi, et al.,

Museo del Tessuto Edizioni, Prato,

2006.

Réal, Daniel, Tissus Espagnols et Portu -

gais, Libraire des Arts Décoratifs,

Paris, [1925].

Reichel, Herbert, Berühmte Orient-

Teppiche aus historischer Sicht,

Reichel, Rheinberg, 1969.

Riefstahl, Rudolf Meyer, ‘Das Palmeten -

motiv auf einem Ägyptischen Teppich

der Ballerd-Sammlung’, in Jahrbuch

des Asiatischen Kunst, vol.II, pp.159–

62, 1925.

Riegl, Alois, ‘Die Ausstellung oriental-

ischer Teppiche im K.K. Österr.

Handelsmuseum’, in Mitteilungen des

K.K. Österreichischen Museums für

Kunst und Industrie, 2 parts, N.F. VI.

Jahrgang, no.66, pp.383–91, no.67,

pp.405–14, Vienna, 1891.

Riegl, Alois, ‘Altere orientalische Teppiche’,

in Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen

Sammlungen des Allerhochasten

Kaiserhauses, vol.XIII, pp.311–13, 1892.

Sánchez Ferrer, José, Alfombras Antiguas

de la Provincia de Albacete, Instituto de

Estudios Albacetenses, Albacete, 1986.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Mittelalterliche Knüpf tep -

piche kleinasiatischer und spanischer

Herkunft’, in Kunst und Kunsthand -

werk, vol.X, pp.503ff., Vienna, 1907.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Teppiche auf der

Mohammedanischen Ausstellung in

München 1910’, in Kunst und Kunst -

handwerk, XIII, pp.469–86, 1910.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Orientalischen

Teppiche aus dem ehemaligen Wiener

Hofbesitz’, in Der Kunstwanderer,

pp.444–7, 1920.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Ägyptische Herkunft

der Sogennanten Damakus-Teppiche’,

in Zeitschrift für Bildende Kunst,vol.XXXII, pp.75ff., 1921.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘Die Ägyptischen Teppiche’,

in Jahrbuch des Asiatischen Kunst,

vol.I, pp.19–25, 1924.

Sarre, Friedrich, ‘A Fourteenth-Century

Spanish Synagogue Carpet’, in Bur -

lington Magazine, LVI, pp.89–95, 1930.

Sarre, Friedrich, and Hermann Trenkwald,

Old Oriental Carpets, Leipzig,

1926–29.

Schlosser, Ignace, The Book of Rugs,

Oriental and European, Bonanza, New

York, 1963.

Schuette, Marie, Perser-Teppiche, Leipzig,

1935.

Schürmann, Ulrich, Bilderbuch für Tep -

pich sammler, with a foreword by Kurt

Erdmann, Kunst und Technik Verlags,

Munich, [1960].

Scott, Philippa, The Book of Silk, Thames

and Hudson, London, 1993.

Serjeant, R.B., Islamic Textiles, Material

for a History up to the Mongol Con -

quest, Beirut, 1972.

Sherrill, Sarah B., ‘The Islamic Tradition in

Spanish Rug Weaving: Twelfth through

Seventeenth Centuries’, in The

Magaz ine Antiques, vol.105, no.3,

pp.532–49, March 1974.

Sherrill, Sarah B., Carpets and Rugs of

Europe and America, Abbeville Press,

New York, 1996.

Spallanzani, Marco, Oriental Rugs in

Renaissance Florence, Bruschettini

Foundation for Islamic and Asian Art,

Textile Studies I, SPES, Florence 2007.

Spallanzani, Marco, ‘Carpets at the Medici

Court in the Second Half of the Six -

teenth Century’, in Bruschettini Foun -

dation for Islamic and Asian Art,

Islamic Art, [i.p.].

Stockholm, National Museum, Carpet

Fragments, The Marby Rug and Some

Fragments of Carpets Found in Egypt,

exhibition catalogue, text by Carl

Johann Lamm, Nationalmuseums

skriftserie NS 7, Stockholm, 1985.

Stone, Peter, The Oriental Rug Lexicon,

London, 1997.

Stulc, Josef, ‘Mamlúcky koberec v

Kromerízi – neznámá perla textilního

umení v ceskych sbírkách’, in Mater -

ialie, Studie, pp.413–17, 2006.

Suriano, Carlo Maria, ‘Talking Rugs’, in

Ghereh, no.10, p.55, December 1996.

Suriano, Carlo Maria, ‘Mamluk Blazon Car -

pets’, in HALI, 97, pp.72–81, March

1998.

Suriano, Carlo Maria, ‘A Mamluk Land -

scape, Carpet Weaving in Egypt and

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 -

logue of Spanish Rugs, 12th to 19th

Century, Textile Museum catalogue

raisonné vol.2, text by Ernst Kühnel,

technical analysis by Louisa Bellinger,

National Publishing Company, Wash -

ington DC, 1953.

Textile Museum, Washington DC, Cairene

Rugs and Others Technically Related,

Textile Museum catalogue raisonné,

text by Ernst Kühnel, technical analysis

by Louisa Bellinger, National Publishing

Company, Washington DC, 1957.

Theologou, Julia, ‘Fustat Carpet Frag ments’,

in HALI, 156, pp.65–71, 2008.

Thompson, Jon, ‘Medallion Carpets, Their

Elusive Origin’, in The Sarre Mamluk

and 12 other Classical Rugs, pp.8–15,

auction catalogue, Lefevre, London,

23 May 1980.

Thompson, Jon, Milestones in the History

of Carpets, published on the occasion

of the exhibition of the same name at

Galleria Moshe Tabibnia, Milan, 14

Oct ober to 11 November 2006, Moshe

Tabibnia, Milan, 2006.

Thomson, W.G., ‘Hispano-Moresque Car -

pets’, in Burlington Magazine, vol.XVIII,

no.92, pp.100–11, London, 1910.

Thomson, W.G., ‘Spanish Carpets’, in

Apollo, II, pp.229–35, 1925.

Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, Lugano,

The Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,

Carpets and Textiles, text by Friedrich

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

orientalischer Teppiche’, in Zeitschrift

für bildende Kunst, LXIII, p. 247–56,

1930.

Troll, Siegfried, ‘Ein Orientalischer Teppich

aus Kaiserlichem Besitz’, in Jahrbuch

des Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen,

Sonderheft 112, Vienna, 1937(1).

Troll, Siegfried, ‘Damaskus-Teppiche,

Prob leme der Teppichforschung’, in

Ars Islamica, vol.IV, pp.201–31,

1937(2).

Turkish and Islamic Arts Museum, Istan -

bul, Anatolian Carpets, Masterpieces

from the Museum of Turkish and

Islamic Arts, text by Nazan Ölçer and

Walter B. Denny, 2 vols, Ertug and

Kocabiyik, Bern, 1999.

Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul, Carpets of the

Vakıflar Museum, Istanbul, text by

Belkıs Balpinar and Udo Hirsch,

Wesel, 1988.

Venice, Palazzo Ducale, Arabeschi, exhib -

it ion catalogue, 19 July to 31 October

1991, edited by Giovanni Curatola,

Marsilio, Venice, 1991.

94 HALI ISSUE 157

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

Venice, Palazzo Ducale, Eredità dell’Islam-

Arte Islamica in Italia, exhibition cata -

logue, organised by the Comune di

Venezia, 30 October 1993 to 30 April

1994, edited by Giovanni Curatola,

Silvana Editoriale, Milan, 1993.

Venice, Palazzo Ducale, Venezia e l'Islam

828–1797, exhibition catalogue, 28 July

to 25 November 2007, edited by

Stefano Carboni, Marsilio, Venice, 2007.

Viale, Mercedes, and Vittorio Viale, Arazzi

e Tappeti Antichi, Novara, 1969.

Victoria and Albert Museum, London,

Guide to the Collection of Carpets,

text by A.F. Kendrick, Victoria and

Albert Museum, London, 1915.



text by A.F. Kendrick, Victoria and


Victoria and Albert Museum, London, Fine

Carpets in the Victoria & Albert Mus -

eum, text by A.F. Kendrick and C.E.C.

Tattersall, E. Benn, London, 1924.



text by C.E.C. Tattersall, Victoria and


Vienna, Orientalische Teppiche, introduc t -

ion by A. von Scala, text by J.M. Stöc -

kel, et al., 2 vols, Österreich ischen

Handels-Museum, Vienna, 1892.

Vienna, Österreichisches Museum für

Kunst und Industrie, Ausstellung Ori -

en talischer Teppiche aus ehemals

Kaiser lichem Besitz, exhibition cata -

logue, text by H. Trenkwald, Vienna,

1920.

Völker, Angela, ‘Überlegungen zur Neu -

aufstellung der Orientteppich-sam -

mlung des Österreichischen Museums

für angewandte Kunst in Wien’ in

HALI, 2/1, pp.12–15, Spring 1979.

Washington DC, Textile Museum, Weav -

ing 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

Splendor of Turkish Weaving, exhibit ion

catalogue, 9 November 1973 to 24

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

Dimand, Louise Mackie and Charles

Grant Ellis, The Textile Museum,

Washington DC, 1974.


From the Far West: Carpets and Tex -

iles of Morocco, exhibition cata logue,

1980, edited by Patricia Fiske, Russell

Pickering and Ralph Yohe, The Textile

Museum, Washington, DC, 1980.


Mamluk Rug Exhibition, 17 March to

26 June 1981, arranged by Patricia

Fiske, The Textile Museum, Wash -

ington DC, 1981.

Washington DC, The Textile Museum, The

Classical Tradition in Anatolian Carpets,

exhibition catalogue, 13 September

2002 to 16 February 2003, text by

Walter B. Denny and Sumru Belger

Krody, Scala, London, 2002.

Washington DC, A World of Oriental Car -

pets and Textiles, exhibition catalogue,

17 to 21 April 2003, for the Xth Inter -

national Conference on Oriental Car -

pets, edited by Murray L. Eiland Jr.,

ICOC, Washington DC, 2003.

Wearden, Jennifer, ‘Europe’, in World

Rugs and Carpets, edited by David

Black, pp.204–21, Country Life Books,

London, 1985.

Weeks, Jeanne G., and Donald Tregan -

owan, 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 -

pet and Textile Studies II. Carpets of

the `Mediterranean Countries 1400-

1600, pp.139–50, edited by Robert

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 Gebets -

teppichen und ihre Datierung’, in

Berliner Museen, Berichte aus der

ehem. Preussiuscher Kunstsam m -

lung, Jg. 11, pp.6–14, Berlin, 1961(1).

Zick, Johanna, Die Berliner Kunstsamm -

un gen und unser Bild von der islam -

ischen Kunstentwicklung, Berlin,

1961(2).

Zick, Johanna, ‘Koptische Muster elem -

ente und mamlukische Knüpf tep piche’,

in Jahrbuch der hamburger Kunst -

sammlungen, vol.VII, pp.93ff., 1962.

Zick-Nissen, Johanna, ‘Das Wolken band -

motiv als Kompositionselement auf

osmanischen Teppichen’, in Berliner

Museen, Berichte aus den Preus s -

ischen Kunstsammlungen, Berlin, 1966.

Zipper, Kurt, Orientteppiche. Vom Ursprung

bis zur Gegenwart, Keysers Sammler-

Bibliothek, Munich, 1982.

HALI ISSUE 157 95