Fig. 1. Anatolian carpet with large stars, beginning 16th century, 543x228 cm., private collection, Geneva

Recently, a carpet collector from Geneva discovered a remarkable early Turkish carpet showing four large eightpointed stars1 (Fig. 1). Until now, this type was only known from a fragment kept in the Bavarian National Museum in Munich (Fig. 2). Judging by their structure, their colors, and some of their motifs, both the Munich fragment and the Geneva carpet were undoubtedly knotted in Anatolia; apart from that, however, they exhibit essential features of the Mamluk carpets from Cairo (Figs. 3 and 4). As to pinpointing the carpet's place of origin inside Anatolia more precisely, there are no clues to be found. As a connecting link between Turkish and Egyptian carpet art in the l5th and l6th centuries, this type of carpet is of particular importance. In 1537 Hans Holbein the Younger painted a similar carpet on a fresco showing Henry VIII and his family. Whitehall Palace, where the fresco was situated, burnt down in 1698; however, a fragment of Holbein's original cartoon2 as well as two copies by Remigius van Leemput still exist.3 The entire middle part of the Munich fragment is missing; the two remaining end portions were sewn together; the edges are missing, too. The Geneva carpet is still complete and, considering that it is almost 500 years old, its condition is relatively good. Woven ends and selvedges are present.

Comparison between the Munich Fragment, the Geneva Carpet and the Carpet in Holbein's Painting

All other differences between the three carpets are less eye-catching. They mainly appear in the main borders and the bordering of the stars. All three carpets have a white strap interlace border. The Holbein fresco carpet shows a closed "kufic" border of type Cl4. The Munich fragment shows a complicated open "kufic" border of type A4 on its upper end; its remaining other three sides show two alternating interlacing strap motifs which are also to be found on all four sides of the Geneva carpet. Only one (supposedly) English needlework carpet of the 17th century5 displays such a border as well.

One motif in the border part contains a central star; another one is formed as an interlacing "endless" knot from both sides of which radiate double hooks ("flagpoles"). The Geneva border shows the same motif as the Munich one only at its beginning, but the second motif then changes into a simpler form: the "endless" knot is replaced by a simple lozenge. Moreover, the interlacing of the strap on the Geneva border parts is levelled off nearly everywhere, i.e., the strap does not pass up and down.

The large stars are surrounded by many stripes, two of which contain patterns of identical width although they differ in form. The inner stripe shows an angular vine from which radiate, in turn, shorter and longer branches (Ellis6 calls this "triple-curl-stripe"). The outer stripe contains hexagons with onlaid S-designs. The fresco carpet shows the S-strip on both star borders.

The principal design as well as the main colors of the large star medallions are the same on all three carpets. The two remaining stars on the Munich fragment are identical, whereas only two of the four stars on the Geneva sample show identical centers. The structure of the Munich and the Geneva carpets is very similar; it corresponds, all in all, to the large-pattern Holbein carpets. Their knot density is relatively low. The similarities in pattern, colors and structure point to the strong possibility that all these carpets were made in the same region, possibly even by the same manufacturer.

1. Holbein's fresco was painted in 1537.
2. The Munich fragment shows a composition of large motifs accompanied by pairs of smaller ones; this scheme corresponds exactly to the one of the Type IV Holbein carpets which can be found on European paintings from the end of the l5th century7. Accordingly, the early preserved Holbein carpets (IV type) are dated in the beginning of the l6th century.
3. Not before the end of the 15th century did an influence of Mamluk designs become apparent on Anatolian carpets; it remained obvious until about the middle of the l6th century.
Recently, a radiocarbon analysis of this carpet was done by Professor W. Wolfli, director of the Institut fu*r Mittelenergiephysik of the Eidgenijssische Technische Hochschule (ETH), Zurich, Switzerland. Two samples of wool, 100 mg. each, of two different sections were needed. The analysis was done with an accelerator mass spectrometer (AMS). The measurements on the basis of the C14 activity were corrected using the newest dendrochronological tables. The result for the date is the range between the end of the 15th century and the beginning of the l6th century.

The conquest of Egypt by the Ottomans in 1517 has considerable influence on carpet manufactury; however, an exchange of ideas for patterns had taken place before the invasion.

Fig. 4. Mamluk rug, Egyptian (Cairo), first half of 16th century, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Plate 39.

Fig. 5. Medallian soumak, Caucasus, 8'7"x6'11", Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam

Not so much on Mamluk carpets6 but rather on most large pattern Holbein carpets9 we find an inner border of large stars with the "triple-curl-stripe." The same applies to the outer S border of the large stars which was frequently used to surround the octagons of the large pattern Holbein carpets.10

Budlike patterns at the very edge of the outside of the large stars are typical for Anatolian carpets; only occasionally do they appear on Mamluks. The interlacing strap border is, as mentioned before, also a typical Anatolian element. The Munich fragment has some remnants of an outer guard stripe which shows an Anatolian pattern of complex S-figures.

Technical Analysis

The Carpet in Munich Warp: Ivory wool, Z2S Weft: Wool, Z-spun, some Z2S; two wefts: first, straight; second, slightly sinuous, red Pile: Wool, two yarns, loosely plied Knots: Symmetric, horizontal 26 per decimeter, vertical 31 per decimeter, 806 per square decimeter Colors: DARK GREEN, light green, red, light red, blue, light blue, yellow, dark brown, white Ends: Missing, no selvedges preserved

The Carpet in Geneva

2. National Portrait Gallery, London, cat. no. 4027, 258 x 137 cm. Damaged, only the border of the carpet is recognizable.

3. Hali Vol.3, No.3,1981, p. 177, fig. 1.

4. Robert Pinner and Jackie Stanger, "Kufic Borders on Small Pattern Holbein Carpets," Hali, Vol. 1 , No. 4, 1978, p.336

5. Kurt Erdmann, Europa und der Orientteppich, l962, Abb. 22 (Victoria & Albert Museum), and D. King and D. Sylvester, The Eastern Carpet in the Western World, 1983, fig. 31, p. 28.

6. Charles Grant Ellis, "A Soumak-Woven Rug," Textile Museum Journal I, No. 2, 1963.

7. Christine Klose, "Einige Teppichdarstellungen in französischen Stundenbüchern"Hali, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1979, p. 8l-82.

8. Friedrich Spühler, "Chessboard Rugs," in Oriental and Textile Studies, p. 261-270 and Die Orienteppische im Museum für Islamische Kunst , Berlin, p. 60-61, 66-67.

9a. East-Berlin, Islam. Mus. Inv. Nr. I,29, Kurt Erdmann, Der orientalische Knüpteppische, Abb. 37, outside border;
b. West-Berlin, Mus. fur Islam. Kunst, Inv. Nr. X3,522, Kurt Erdmann, Der orientalische Knüpteppische,, Abb. 35, edge of two octagons;
c. Istanbul, Mus. for Turkish and Islamic Art, Inv. no. 701 , Der orientalische Knüpteppische,Hali 25, 1985, p. 41, inside and outside border.

10 a. Carpet of note 9b;
b. Washington, Textile Museum, Inv. no. R.34.2.1, Louise Mackie, The Splendor of Turkish Weaving, no. 28;
a and b. Edge of the middle octagon.

11. Belcis Acar, Divrigi Ula Camii ve Darussifasi Vakiflar Genel Müdürlüguü Yaginlari, 1979, no. 8, inv. no. A-1 19-73-2, and Oktay Aslanapa, One Thousand Years of Turkish Carpets, l988, pl. 76.
11a. Aslanapa, op cit., pl. 77.

12. A connection of the Anatolian Ghirlandaio-pattern with the Mamluk stars is possible. Carpets with large stars are to be found in East Anatolia in the l9th century (Antike Orienttepiche aus österreichischem Besitz, 1986, no. 36).

13. cf. also Alberto Boralevi, Sumakh, l986, p. 22-23.

The rug is not in the best condition, but rugs from the l6th century rarely are. Several holes in the field of the rug have also been rewoven; these date from different times. The pile otherwise is as good as what one finds in most museum Mamluks. Although thin, the depressed warps have prevented erosion of areas of exposed warps and wefts, so that the design is clear and visible.

The colors are standard for the type: a cochineal red, an abrashed blue generally in a mid-blue range, and a firm, deep green. There is a minor use of a natural ivory.

The field design is dominated by a large octagon medallion containing two smaller medallions. Most Mamluk medallions are derived from a square-on-square or eight pointed medallion. In some, as in this rug, the points have been eliminated. A clear eight-point medallion is found in the very center of this rug. The two horizontal end panels in the field contain papyrus motifs and lancet leaves. The closest to this rug in Cairene Rugs by Kuhnel and Bellinger is Textile Museum R7.7, Plates 1 and XXI.

Fig.6. Section of the border

Pairing of the half medallions of the border results in an eight pointed Mamluk medallion, drawing by Harold Elliott.

The drawing here is decidedly tile-like, seemingly composed of large and small segments. Because our eye wants to find a pattern which can be encompassed in its entirety, the main element appears to be an hourglass shape tilted at a 45 degree angle. After studying this rug carefully, it seems to me that the main pattern consists of half eight-pointed stars in alternate right/left repeats at the edge of the border (Figures 1 & 2). This eight-pointed star appears in the center of the rug as well.

If one accepts this interpretation of the border, one can then see a relationship to the subject rug presented by Ms. Klose. The largest element in the border can be seen to be based on the square-on-square medallion concept. If the dating of this Mamluk to the beginning of the l6th century is correct, it is a type which could have been contemporary to the Geneva rug and served as a model. A link between Mamluk rug patterns and those of the Ottoman period, as evidenced by the Geneva rug and others such as the checkerboard and Para-Mamluks, may be strengthened.

In addition to the color illustration, Figure 3, a black and white photo taken with a blue filter is presented in Figure 6, which shows more clearly details of the design (Figure 3).

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS