- 36
A 'TRANSYLVANIAN' DOUBLE NICHE RUG, WEST ANATOLIA |
Estimate
8,000 - 12,000 GBP
Log in to view results
bidding is closed
Description
- approximately 173 by 123cm; 5ft. 8in., 4ft.
- third quarter 17th century
Provenance
Christie's, London, 9 June 1977, lot 11
Literature
Spuhler, Friedrich., The Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, London, 1998, pl. 9, pp.52-53
Condition
Overall measurements: 119cm across the top, 123cm across the bottom, 173cm the left hand side, 169cm the right hand side. Pile fair to low, generally worn to knotbars with areas of foundation visible and scattered throughout, visible from the image, particularly associated to the dark chestnut brown. Scattered small areas of re-piling. A 14cm wide strip on the left hand side of the border appears to have been cut and rejoined with a very minor loss of probably 5mm between the two sections. The outer replaced section has a re-weave about halfway down (by the white cartouche), irregularly shaped (approx. 36cm at maximum length, 14 - 24cm in width) this section has been wefted with a red wool which has bled and is visible on the face of the rug and very clear on the reverse; this repair predates Spuhler's publication. Additional images can be requested from the dept. Sidecords are partially original. Ends with closely trimmed warps and overlocked.
"In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective, qualified opinion. Prospective buyers should also refer to any Important Notices regarding this sale, which are printed in the Sale Catalogue.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS PRINTED IN THE SALE CATALOGUE."
"In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective, qualified opinion. Prospective buyers should also refer to any Important Notices regarding this sale, which are printed in the Sale Catalogue.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS PRINTED IN THE SALE CATALOGUE."
Catalogue Note
One of the earliest studies of the ‘Transylvanian’ group was conducted by the noted scholar Emile Schmutzler. In his discussion, of this particular work, Friedrich Spuhler cites Schmutzler who had previously broken the genre into various differing groups, to which this present lot most closely matches the second of these descriptions, Spuhler, ibid, p. 54. In his comprehensive study of the entire ‘Transylvanian’ group Stefano Ionescu suggests that this particular design, with the inclusion of the mosque lamps, accounts for only approximately one third of the ‘double niches’ in existence, see Ionescu (2005), p. 122, cat. 95. All 'Transylvanians' are believed to have originated from Oushak, and it is interesting to see this particular design is most like the ‘small medallion’ rugs of the Ottoman courts. One similar example can be seen in the Black Church in Brașov, Ionescu. S., Ibid, p. 116, cat. 78, which shares both colour and design, and with similar outer guards. There are two further closely related published examples, see Baktari (1994), pp. 143 & 144, nos. 52 & 53. Transylvanian Rugs
It perhaps should be seen as an oddity that this group of rugs, which are now agreed to have come from the weaving centre of Oushak in Western Turkey, should be given the apparent misnomer of ‘Transylvanian’. However the name has been affectionately coined because of the number of these weavings which still remain in Lutheran and Saxon Evangelical churches in modern day Romania; the largest collection is in situ in the Black Church in Brașov. However, perhaps it should not come as such a surprise that such rich collections are still to be found there.
From the mid-16th, to late 17th century, Transylvania was an autonomous principality of the Ottoman Empire and the rugs themselves had enormous significance both within local government and as symbols of wealth and stature; used as diplomatic gifts and important symbols within social rituals, families would even prefer to pay their taxes in cash, than to have their rug taken away. Following trade privileges being granted by Mehmet II (1432 – 1481), in 1453, Turkish rugs were used as valuable commodities by Ottoman merchants travelling the Silk Road and were exchanged in Transylvania for expensive spices and coffee.
Within the group there are four agreed main design types, two of which are offered here. The ‘single niche’, or prayer rug, lot 66, and the ‘double niche’ - lots 32, 33, 36 & 58. Theories are inconclusive as to why the ‘double niche’ rugs came into being, but it is widely agreed that they are later in dating to the single niche and the development of the design is most likely attributable to religious beliefs or the export market. There is speculation that they were created following the edict by Sultan Ahmed I (1590 – 1617) prohibiting the representation of the mihrab, or niche, for items which were intended for non-Muslim countries, therefore the single niche was mirrored to create the double niche design. It would seem that their appearance and growth in popularity in Europe from the mid-17th century would support this, see Boralevi. A & Ionescu. S, Antique Ottoman Rugs in Transylvania, Rome, 2005, p. 60. However, there is still some discussion as to exactly when the ‘double niche’ design was born, see 'A lesson in Looking', Frances. M., Hali, Reviews, Exhibitions, Issue 175, Spring 2013, p. 118 & 119 for further discussion on the matter. Notably in this article the work under consideration bears a number of qualities very similar to lot 32 suggesting it is likely that they are of similar date; possibly even from the same workshop. Irrespective of the origin of the ‘double niche’ design, what is agreed is that the rugs were powerful trade commodities coveted by the Western world; perhaps the design simply evolved with changing tastes. Owing to a number of the ‘Transylvanian’ group being reproduced in paintings, and recorded in 17th century inventories, we are also able to give some distinctive dating, for example Cornelius de Vos, Portrait of Abraham Grapheus, circa 1620, Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Antwerp, depicts a star and cartouche border double niche ‘Transylvanian’ similar to lot 32.
The ‘Transalvanian’ group is one that has always fascinated; they are highly sought after in the collecting community and examples are now in the permanent collections of highly prestigious museums. These include the Brukenthal National Museum, Sibiu, the Museum of Applied Arts, Budapest, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, The Philadelphia Museum of Art and the Victoria & Albert Museum, London - amongst others. The seminal work written by Alberto Boralevi and Stefano Ionescu, Antique Ottoman Rugs in Transylvania, is one of the foremost insights into this extraordinary phenomenon. For further information on this topic we recommend interested parties review this publication for a more comprehensive discussion. Sotheby’s is grateful to Stefano Ionescu for his assistance in the cataloguing of lots 32, 33, 36, 58 & 66.
Ionescu (2005): Ionescu. S., Antique Ottoman Rugs in Transylvania, Rome, 2005, p. 122, cat. 95.
Baktari (1994): Baktari. F., Ottoman Turkish Carpets the Collections of the Museum of Applied Arts Budapest, I, Budapest, 1994, pp. 143 & 144, nos. 52 & 53.
It perhaps should be seen as an oddity that this group of rugs, which are now agreed to have come from the weaving centre of Oushak in Western Turkey, should be given the apparent misnomer of ‘Transylvanian’. However the name has been affectionately coined because of the number of these weavings which still remain in Lutheran and Saxon Evangelical churches in modern day Romania; the largest collection is in situ in the Black Church in Brașov. However, perhaps it should not come as such a surprise that such rich collections are still to be found there.
From the mid-16th, to late 17th century, Transylvania was an autonomous principality of the Ottoman Empire and the rugs themselves had enormous significance both within local government and as symbols of wealth and stature; used as diplomatic gifts and important symbols within social rituals, families would even prefer to pay their taxes in cash, than to have their rug taken away. Following trade privileges being granted by Mehmet II (1432 – 1481), in 1453, Turkish rugs were used as valuable commodities by Ottoman merchants travelling the Silk Road and were exchanged in Transylvania for expensive spices and coffee.
Within the group there are four agreed main design types, two of which are offered here. The ‘single niche’, or prayer rug, lot 66, and the ‘double niche’ - lots 32, 33, 36 & 58. Theories are inconclusive as to why the ‘double niche’ rugs came into being, but it is widely agreed that they are later in dating to the single niche and the development of the design is most likely attributable to religious beliefs or the export market. There is speculation that they were created following the edict by Sultan Ahmed I (1590 – 1617) prohibiting the representation of the mihrab, or niche, for items which were intended for non-Muslim countries, therefore the single niche was mirrored to create the double niche design. It would seem that their appearance and growth in popularity in Europe from the mid-17th century would support this, see Boralevi. A & Ionescu. S, Antique Ottoman Rugs in Transylvania, Rome, 2005, p. 60. However, there is still some discussion as to exactly when the ‘double niche’ design was born, see 'A lesson in Looking', Frances. M., Hali, Reviews, Exhibitions, Issue 175, Spring 2013, p. 118 & 119 for further discussion on the matter. Notably in this article the work under consideration bears a number of qualities very similar to lot 32 suggesting it is likely that they are of similar date; possibly even from the same workshop. Irrespective of the origin of the ‘double niche’ design, what is agreed is that the rugs were powerful trade commodities coveted by the Western world; perhaps the design simply evolved with changing tastes. Owing to a number of the ‘Transylvanian’ group being reproduced in paintings, and recorded in 17th century inventories, we are also able to give some distinctive dating, for example Cornelius de Vos, Portrait of Abraham Grapheus, circa 1620, Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Antwerp, depicts a star and cartouche border double niche ‘Transylvanian’ similar to lot 32.
The ‘Transalvanian’ group is one that has always fascinated; they are highly sought after in the collecting community and examples are now in the permanent collections of highly prestigious museums. These include the Brukenthal National Museum, Sibiu, the Museum of Applied Arts, Budapest, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, The Philadelphia Museum of Art and the Victoria & Albert Museum, London - amongst others. The seminal work written by Alberto Boralevi and Stefano Ionescu, Antique Ottoman Rugs in Transylvania, is one of the foremost insights into this extraordinary phenomenon. For further information on this topic we recommend interested parties review this publication for a more comprehensive discussion. Sotheby’s is grateful to Stefano Ionescu for his assistance in the cataloguing of lots 32, 33, 36, 58 & 66.
Ionescu (2005): Ionescu. S., Antique Ottoman Rugs in Transylvania, Rome, 2005, p. 122, cat. 95.
Baktari (1994): Baktari. F., Ottoman Turkish Carpets the Collections of the Museum of Applied Arts Budapest, I, Budapest, 1994, pp. 143 & 144, nos. 52 & 53.