The Moghul "Strapwork" Carpets, Oriental Rug Review 11:6, 1991, 28-37.

THE MOGHUL "STRAPWORK" CARPETSby Munay L. Eiland, Jr.

My complaints began with the very title ofIanBennett's llali contribution (Issue 41),

"Isfahan 'strapwork' Carpets," an

excellent discussion of a deservedly

praised group, whichprovides a plausible

answer to virh:ally every question aboutdencethatI believe,believing

an lrdianoutlininghowever,reader have available the Bennett article,

as I will make reference to his plates.

The label "strapwork" is vividlydescriptive of the broad, colored bands that

curl about the fields of these pieces, whme

basic architecture is constructed on a

foundation of the scrolling vinework and

arabesque forms we see on the standard

Indo-Hirat carpets. Here, however, the

tliin lines of vinework are replaced withthicker, shaplike bands. Consequently the

subsidiary in these pieces, which Erdmann

describes as "Arabesque Carpets"'Bennett identifies seven sffaPwork

carpets, which seemtorePresent variations

on ihe same desigr. As Erdmarmt poit i.dout in an eadier discussion of these rugs,

however, it is more accurate to describe

appear in comPlete

carpet. In Erdmann'weare ableto seethe

theCorcorancarpet, No. 5 onBennett's1ist,

andtheHamburg piece, whichBeffIett lists

as No. 2. The two Bijapur carpets and the

Benguiat piece easily fit within this

framework, although the JaiPur and

particularly theEmory pieces show slightly

morecomplexitY.Thereasorthis rneticulousdesigrr analysis

ispertinenthere is that Bennett cit'es, aspart

of his rationale for an Isfahan origin, an

alleged relatiorship to several of the silk

and metal brocaded "Polonaise" carpets

we have good reason to see as Isfahan

work. The Aberconwayfragmentdepicted

for the two t1'Pes.

Itideed, the Polonaise carpets differ so

carpets inof colors,

itseemstomethat anoriginforboth gouPs

in-.he sameplace is the onehypothesis we-

could immediately reject. While three oftlre seven known shapwork carpets were

Figure 10, Vine-Scroll and Palnette

CarpeL Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1977- 167-

1050.

been found among the hrurdreds of pre-

withmost l6thard lTthcentuyPersianand

forurd in India, I have notknown of a singlePolonaise piece to have

Figure 1. OveraII design'

as r e c o nslrucle d bY E rdn ann,

onwhich the snaPwork

carpets are bced The long

re ctangb rePrese nts lhe

portion of the design used in the

C larlr/C o r c o r an c a rPet, w hi le

the smaller recmngb shows

thatWftincludedinthc

Hamburg carPet.

28 Oriental Rug Review

Figure 3. Wall ilecotation lrom lhe

Asat Mahal in Bijapur, the buiUing in

which the snapwork carpets were origitwlly

found. lVhile not i.dzntical to the carpet

designs, the sc rolling arabesque designs must

certainly be recognized os using the wtne

design lexicon as the carpets. See Note 3,

Cousers, Plate IXXWI.)

are more finely woven. They appear to

have been products of two sharPlY

contrasting aesthetic sensibilities.

So I believe we are on safe ground withthe following sunmary: 1) although the

Polonaise and strapwork carpets are

roughly contemPoraneous, they reached

theWestby differentroutes (tobe discussed

in much greater detail below) ; 2) they use a

dramatically different color spectrum and

combine colors in a di{ferent way; 3) their

approach to design differs dramatically;

^na +l there are significant structural

differences. Frommyperspective,itseemssafe to theorize that they were not woven

inthesameplace atthesametime. But ifnotIsfahan, then where were the strapwork

carpets woven? Idealmoreinformawhich was touched uPon bY Bennett.

The Kashmir PassibilitYEarly writers on the Bijapur carpets

recowrted astory suppliedbylV' W" Drew,collector of the Bijapur Diskict.2 In an

account he included with the carpets when

they were sent along to the trndian Ar1

ExhibiticnatDelhi in 1906, Dtewnoted tlnt:

Figure 2. Corner oJ ait

enormous carPet from the

Sh ine of Imam Al i ar A!-Naiaf. Tht s

huge carpet innvo Pieces (each cfwhich measures 1,4A3 cm. x 408

on.) is knoned i n si ll; wit h si lve r ant

go ld b ro c ade. I t is tho ug ht ta da:e

from the titne ol Shah AbfuN, and.

the de s i g n obviorc ly rese nble s thai

of the AberconwaY {ragmertt

i I lwr rated by Be nne n. The design -.

much sit n pler than that on thz

strapwo rk carPe Ls, howeve r,

representing onlY adroP rePeat cfthe arabesque designshown inthe

ditg rat n (afi e r Aga- Og lu, M e h met,

Safavid Rugs and Textiles, New

Yo* Colwnbin Universiry Pres,

1941'P'9).

The u'oolen carpets have been

preserved in the Asar Mahal, an old

palace... It is, however, not known

whether these carpets were presents'

They were probablY ordered out bY

King Mahamad Adilshah. An old

rnanuscript, Hafi- Kursi-e Parlshalnn,gives the date of their arrival fromKashmirintheyearA.H' 1067 equivalent

to 1657 ofthe Christianera,whichisthelastyearof MahamadAdilshah's reign.

The date is probably authentic as after

Mahamad, the decline of the BijaPur

kingdom had commenced.... It is,

therefore, almost cerlainthat the carPets

are about 250 years old and probably

madeinKashmir.Despite the thoroughly plausible dating

providedbythis arcount, Bennettdismisses

it with the statem ent that " the H afi K t s i - e -

P ads hahan, isunknown to modem scholars

and mustbe corsidered apocryphal unless

and until its existence is established."

Now surely, inacoudof law, amanuscript

that we cannot Produce would be

considered hearsay and not allowed as

evidence. Butindealingwiththehistory ofcarpets, we must often, rurfoffunately, deal

with the faintest suggestions of substatrce,

as firmer documentation simply is not

available. The case for an Isfahan ori gin ofthe shapwork carPets is made uP of such

wisps of evidence. Moreover, we have no

reason to srspect that Drew fabricated his

reference to an old manuscriPt. Bennett

does not tell us which modem scholars he

consultd on this matter, or what other

efforts he made to locate the manuscript.

Condemning it as "apocryphal" is

urmecessarily rigid, and we must keep

three are looser and more sinuous; I'e.'

altemate warps are less deeply depressed.

While these difference are variable and

mayseemsmall,theyzuggesttomethatthetwo groups were not woven in the same

place.In color schemes the two groups could

hardly be more different' Red often inseveral shades used in close proximity is

the dominant color of the stapworkcarpets

and the larger grorp to which they belong'

but it often occurs only in traces on the

Polonaise pieces. These latter t1'pes show

sfrapwork piece. The Polonaise pieces

often do not have a discreet field color, but

relatively large patches of different colors,

Oriental Rug Review

before us the possibility that the Bijaprucarpets were made in Kashmir.

Why Not Bijapur?With no real evidence of a major carpetindustry inKashmirdwingthe lTthcenhtry,however, we might considerthepossibilitythatthoeepieces found in Bijapurmay havebeen woven in the city where they werediscovered. But since there is also notradition of a weaving indr:sty there, andno documentation of a manufactory underMoghul pahonage, we would need someother evidence, perhaps archiiecfural, onwhich to construct such a hypothesis.Bennett mentiors a resemblance of thestrapwork carpet desigrs to the arabesque

decor on the dome of the Shaylhlutfullahmosqueinlsfahan,many thousands ofmilesby camel caravan away. However, when

we compare the dome design to theErdmanndiagrarn, these similarities appear

more superficial. The strapwork carpetsseem at least as closely related to s'trapworkarabesquemotifs on the early 17th cenhuybuildings at Bijapru. Unlike movableobjects, such as carpets, theplace oforiginof buildings isnot opento questidl.

Much of the Bijapurlegacy hasbynowdecayed beyond recognition, but a

wonderfirlfeahreofthe l9hcenturyBritishimperialiss was their habit of makingthorough surveys of local landmarks and

lavistrly publishing the results. The multi-volume Archeological Suruey of Indiaprovides a wealth of information, andVolume XXXVII, Bijapur and itsArchitectural Remains,3 includesimpressive details about thebuildings that

were recently finished or underconstruction when the ca4:ets were woven.

The strapwork carpets were part of the

decor of the Ashar lvlahal, a late 1 6th centurybuildingwhce presentform probably dates

to 1646. Twopiecesofwalldecoration inthisvery building are of the kind of strapworkarabesque designs strongly suggestive ofthefapwokcarpets ( Figure 3 ). Inaddition,parapets of various local contemporarybuildings also often include arabesque

desi grs suggestive of the shapwork carpets

(Figure 4), md a broken piece of parapet

from the Mihtar Mahal (Figure 5) shows

another variant of the strapwork motifs.The iron door bosses from the MihtarMahal and Shah Karim's Tomb ( Fig re 6)

showthesamestyle, and aniron grillefromthe Chini Mahal shows design elernents

Figure 4. Patapet pallerns

Jrom various Bijapurbuildings showing how cottrtnon

strapworkpatterw were on lTtlt

cenrury Bijapurbuildings (Note j).

Figure 5. A portion oJ lhe roo!parapet of the Mihtar Mahal,

s howi ng s c r oll i ng arabe s q re de s i g ns,

Bijapur, 1 7th century Wote 3, Fig. 20).

Figure 6. Iron bosses tromdoorways to the Mihtar-i-Mahal and

Shnh Ka rirn's Tomb, Bijapur, 1 7th

century. Again we see the stropworlg

arabes q ue s ty lc in B ij ap u r a r c hite cture

(Note 3).

30 Oriental Rug Review

Figure 7, Wroughl iron grill excaviled

near the Chini Mahal, Biiapur, early 17th

century- Here we see more scrolling, arabesque

incwork of a style reJlected in the strapwork

carPets (Note 3, Fig. I 5 ).

shongly suggestive of the carpets (Figure

7). Indeed,throughout the city there are

suggestions that the design vocabulary ofthe early 17th century architecture ofBijapwbears amuchshongerresemblanceto the carpets found there than do the

architectural features of Isfahan.

The development of Moghul stYle

architecture in Bijapur also should not be

seenas derivativefromthePersianstyle, as

itisroughly contemporaneouswitha similarstyle fowrd in Isfahan. We camot assume

a Persian origin anymorethanwe canposita Moghul origin for many elements ofdesign.

The Indo-Herat CarPetsInmostrespects, argument over the originof the "shapwork" carpets can be seen as

only a skirmish in the controversy around

the larger class to which they belong. The

enornous group of 16th ttrough 18th

century carpts with red fields, blue or

blue-green borders, and scrollingvineworkpattems ofpalmettes, cloudbands,

and, at times, animals still elicits too muchargument to be settled to everyone'ssatisfaction. These carpets, at times called

Indo-Herats, Indo-Isfahans, or Indo-Persians, are often divided into twocategories.

One group, with sharply angular floralfigures and a frequent lack of symmehy,

often showing large sickle-shaped floralfigures that seem to resemble wisteriablcsoms (Frgz res 8 and9), lnsbeenthought

by most carpets scholars to have been

woven in India. They seldom containcloudbands, and the scrolling vinework isrelatively stiff. Some of this type showanimals, often arranged so as to suggest

hunting scenes.

The second group, which I will describe

in this paper as Indo.Herats, show morerounded, slightly less stylize<l floral f,orms,

with side-to-side symmetry, palmettes, and

gracefully drawn scrolling vinework.There are virtually never animal figures,butmany of these carpets show cloudbands.

The Indo-Herats constitute surely the

largest class of surviving pre-1750 rugs.

Literally hundreds are scattered about the

Figure 8. Detail of a carPel in the lTlh

cenlury Moghul style, Maharaja Sawai

Man Singh I Mreeurn, Jaipur. Note the stiffer,

more sharply angular drawing style ofthefloral

rt g u r e s, pa rtic u ln rly whe n c o mpar ed w ith that of

tlrc morerypicallndo-Herax (Figs l0and I I )

The sickle slaped cluster ofbLossorrs or, perhaps,

grapes b characterisric ofthis rype.

Figure 11. Indo-Heral carpet, India,

9'1"x 17'5 ", l7thcenrury.Thb carpet hcbeen

reduced in le ngth and b slightly stffi r and

p robably late r than F igure 1 0. Theflo ralfi g u res

are stillarranged abngthe courses ofthe

sc ro lling vires, however, and thcflowe rs are s till

b s ang ular than tltosefound o n the g roup

representedby Figures 8 and9. The border

stripe on this carPet and that on Figure 1 0 are

almost ide ntic al to st ipes of arc hitec t u re fou nd in

various Snintings inthe HntzaNma.

world inmuseurns, private collections, and

stately honses (Figures 1 0 atd 1 1). This is

where the conhoversy lies.

Most dealers of the early 20th century

described them aslsfahans. Morerecently,however, such people as Charles Grant

Ellis and the present author have advanced

reasons for believing that both of these

groupswere woveninMoghul India. S ince

the seven "strapwork" carpets identifiedby Bennett clearly belong among the Indo-Herats, it seems appropriate to review the

Indian origin case as it applies to the entiregrouP.

The evidence, which I have previouslydiscussed n Chinese and Exotic Rttgs,a

falls into five categories: architectural

survivals, thelocation of surviving carpets,

early trade records, the appearance ofcarpets inminiature paintings, and structural

analysis. I will discuss each in order.Architectural Evide nce

I canhardly imagine anyone visiting both

Isfahanand the greatMoghul cities withoutrecogrizing that the overwhelming bul k ofevidencefrom survivingbuildin gs supports

anlndian originforthe Indo-Herats. Short

of a visit to India, study of variousArchitecnral Surtey of htlia volumes,

available at somemajorlibraries, should be

sufficient to convince most doubtes.

0riental Rug Review 3 l

Akbar's Tomb at Sikandra, which wasbegrur in about 1600 and finished in 16 10,

probably shows features with the clearestrelevance to the Indo-Herats and the"strapwork" subtype, particularly the innersurfaceofthe great dorne(Figure 12), whilethe figures on either side of the archwayover the enhance to the mausoleum showarabesque forms strongly suggestive ofcarpet designs (Figure 13). The mainenhance to the complex ( Figure 1 4) coddhavebeen designedby the samehand thatproduced a large number of the Indo-Herats.

Even earlier buildings at Fatipur Silaishow shapwork elements of the sort citedbyBerurett (Frgzre 15),andthiscorslnrction(from 1569 to about 1572) substantiallypredates ShahAbbas'smovinghis capital toIsfahan. The slightly laterTornb of Itmad-ud-Daulah inAgrahas amarblefl oorin onesecond story room with a strapworkdesigrrquitesimilartotlratofthecarpets (Figwre I 6),

whilemanyotherdetailsofthesamebuilding

20, Scene lrom the Hamze

Not only do we see Indo-Herat

elemen ts in thc de co r, garmenx, and shie lds,

but the carpetwiththe strapworkborder even

shows a gadapproximation ofthe palmene

ar rang e,ne nt o n the I ndo- H e rats.

32 0riental Rug Review

Figure 9. Carpet in ITlh cetrut!Moghul style, 5'5'xl2'9'. Here we findthe palmettes and sbkle -shapeil chtsters ofleaves so comrnon on a rype of Moghul

carpet, bwtinthla case the anangementof

elements b uymmenical, afeature not

unc ommon on this typ e - Again the

differences in drawingfrom thz typical

Indo-Herat(Figs. lland 1 1)are readily

appa.rent.

Figure 22. Indo-Hcrat carpet,

possibly 76th cefiury, 70'x1j6',Thyss e n- Bo rae m isza C o lb c tio ry C astag rc la-

This piece shows areos ofmemlbrocading ofa differ e nt s tr uc ur e fr o m that fo und in the

menl brocadcd Pobrnise pieces. In fusign itb obviorely anearly Indo-Hera,with

palme na,s c r o I ling i ne s, and c lo udh nds,

strongly resetnb ling several carpe* dzpicted

inthe HamzzNarna.

showcloudbandsandpalmettes ofavirtuallyidentical sorl that appear in the fields andborder stripes on the Indo-Herat rugs(Figurel7).

Older parts of the I-ahore Fort and theRed Fort inDelhi similarly showfeahressuggestive of the Indo-Herats, but only thelater work seems to show the style of themore angular carpts. Surely the sheerbulk of this material and the closeness towhich it relates to lrdo-Herat rug designsprovides evidence around their origin.

The Lacation of Sumiving CarpetsI am not aware of any Indo-Herat calpets

having come to light inPersia,5but severalhundred have been fowrd in lrdia sincethelate 19th cenhrry. Asidefromatleast 1 1

carpets in Bijapur, which included the twostrapwork pieces mentioned by Benneft,and others currentlv to be found in such

places as Ahmedabad and the NationalMuseum in Delhi, there may have been as

many as200 inpossessionoftheMaharajaof Jaipur. This is based on the inventoriesofHendley(prblishedin 1906)andCampbell(unpublished 1929), those that havesubsequently entered the westem market,andmy own inspectionof the carpets still inJaipur. What seerns most peculiar is that

Campbell photographed many pieces notfound by Hendley, missing others foundbyHendley, andlsawexamples apparently

not foundby either of them. It seems, in alllikelihood, that no one ever had the entiregroup together at once, and, despite the

number thathavebeensold, there were stillover 100 remaining in 1978.

Not only were there a large residual ofthese carpets in India but the remainder ofthe world's supply, numbering in the

hundreds,hashrmedupalmost exclusivelyin three places: Portugal, the Netherlands,

and England. Not zurprisingly, these are

the very sea powers that carried on a healytradewithhdia inthe l7thcentury. CarPets

from Persia reaching the west from this

same time perid, however, have been

found in Italy, Arxtria-Hungary, Poland,and France, where the Indo-Herats are

rarely encowrtered. When we consider

howmany of thePolonaisecarpets, most ofwhich were almost certainly woven inIsfahan, have tumedup inltaly, wemightaskwhy Indo-Heratshavenot accumulated

thereiftheyalsoweremadeinlsfahan. Thetheory that the Polonaise carpets were

Figure 2

Name.

Figure 12, Dome af Akbar's tomb, inner

surface, Sikandrqfinishcd 1 610. Not only do we see

two border stipes thatwouU be quite at horne on an

Indo-Herat carpel, but thc arrangement ofPalmettes

on the c e iling follows the satne organization of nn ny

ofthe carpets, with thz scrolling incs drawn nearly

os thickly as in thc strapreork carryts. P hoto by the

awhor.

given as gifts to foreign states is not, Ibelieve, an adequate explanation for the

enorrnous disparity. we know fromcontemporary documents that they werealsoitems of commerce.

The Indo-Herats were apparently wellunderstood to be krdian carpets when theywere traded by the Portuguese. h 1933

Jose Fen-andis Torres6published a catalogto anexhibit of Spanishrugs, whichincludeddetailsfromnumerous Spanishinventoriesdating from 1273 to 1833. Among the

thousands ofrugslised many incollectiorsofroyalty,there seemedtobe considerable

attention paid to corurtries of origin, withentries for carpets from Cairo, Trurisia,

Turkey, and, of course, various parts ofSpain. Only six carpets were alleged tobefrom Persia, none of which was described

as having a red field. There were over 100

entries for carpets described as "de laIndia de Portugal," a term so specific and

consistent as to suggest some directknowledge of the origin of these rugs.

Figure 13. Decor over the entrance to lhe

musoleum, Akhr's Tomb, Sikandra- Here we

se e a larg e c e nt ral cb udfun{flan*ed by pa ne b ofs c r o lling arabe s quc w o r k hi g h ly s ug g e s tive of I ndo -

He rat carpets. Photo by the autho r.

Figure 14. Decor over the nnin entrance

to Akbar's Tomb, Siltnndra. Here we see tnore

ofthe same dtcorative ebntents, tlle polDrctes,

c loudbands, and s c rol Li ng ire s fo u nd o t r r lrc I ndo -

H erat carpe * and thz najor illretrated boo ks ofAkbar's coun.

Descriptions of these rugs also leave nodoubtthatthey arethe sameredfield,blue-green border pieces still so common inSpanish and Portuguese museums. Theearliest entries occur in inventoriesbetween 1571 and 1598,whichisimportantinthat ShahAbbas didnotmovehis capitalto Isfahan, previor:sly a town of minorimportance and probably not a source ofrugs, until 1598. The red field ca4>ets,

described as old and venerable, inpossession of Queen Margaita n a L6I2inventory, are thus unlikely to have beenIsfahan work. Surely the Spaniardspurchased a large number ofthese carpets

from the Portuguese from the late 16th

century, and they believed them to be ofIndian make.

Even more of these carpets have been

recovered inPortugal itsef, including some

surviving examples known to have beenpossessiors of the Braganza (royal) family.There is good reason to believe that the

Benguiats purchased mo6t of the Indo-

Herats theybrought to market in Portugal,including, quite probably, their strapworkcarpet.Documenlation in Trade Records

Bennett makes a big point of a singlerurpublished letter of L624 cited by OnnoYdema, referring to irstructions given bythe DutchEastlndia Company to its factorin Surat that he should purchase 540 highquality Persian carpets or 300 Persiancarpets if cheaper and better Indian carpets

were available for the remainder.In contast to that are literally hundreds

of references to Indian carpets in the

substantial surviving trade records of theBritish, beginning with SirThomas Roe'saccountsTofbuying carpets inlndia (16 15-

16 19) andincludingevenaccounts of carpet

trade carried on by the Dutch and

Portuguese. In a letter of December 20,

1617, the factors at Agra described to theBritishEastlndia Company that Portuguese

factors which came from Goa to the coutt,Agra, and Brampore, brought "nothinge

Figure 15. Detail lrom the Jama Mashid

at Folepur Sikri, finbhzd in 1572. Thz srripe of

strapworkhere is similar to borde rs on Pers ian rugs,

which Bennetl cites asfurther evidznce oJa Persian

provenance for the snapwork carpets. Obviously thc

design wos also within the bxicon of the Moghuls.

Photo by the author.

Figure 16. Inlaid marble floor, Tomb ofItmad ud-Daukth, Agra, early lTth century.

Here we see the same kind ofscrolling arabesques

found on the strapwork carpets.

Figure 17. Detail o! the Tontb oJ Ilmad ud-

Dauhh, Agra Not only do we see tlrc cLoudbands

andpa.lmenes in the comers, drawn u tltey ofen

appear on Indo-He rot ca rpe ts, but t he bo rde r st r ipe,

of sc ro lling arabes que fo n ns, b s u gg e s t iv e of r lnstrapwork carPets.

Oriental Hug Review 33

butjewels, which they retume imployed inindico,... carpetts and the lyke."tT\e D inrie s of Str eyts ham M aste r, I 67 5 -

1580 e provides the following account:'The Dutch have a very advantageoustrade in Bengala, and commonly a grerrt

stock... They carry hence Rice, Oyle,Butter, hemp, cordage, saile cloth, ...

Ginghams,Tapits [0.E.,carpet,hangtng]..."(We might note here that Bengal, being inEastem India, would not likely be a sourceof Persian carpets.) The same authorprovidessomeintere$inginformationabortthe city of Ellore, from whichhe ordered

many carpets:'o '"fhis Ellore... where are

made thebest Carpetts (afterthemannerofthose in Persia), by a race of Persiars,which they told us came over about 100years agoe." He continued to tell of the

manner of weaving, by boys 8 to 12 years,

including information that a mandirectedthe worlg "with the Patteme of the workedrawne upon paper." We should note that

this is conhary to the usual Indian "talim"system. On at least one occasion, 100 ofthese Ellore pieces were orderedby lvla.ster

to be sent home to England.ttBritishEasthdia Company records, many

of which are published and available inmajor libraries, are replete with suchreferences, and if all the orders weretabulated, they would certainly add up tomany thousandsofcarpets. Likemerchantsof today, many of the British factorscomplained about slow deliveries ofcontracted goods, weaving quality inferiorto what had been agreed upon, and a

general uravailability of desirable goods

on the open market, partially because

demandfromthe court seems oftentohavebeen high.

Mr. Bennett concludes his argument foran Isfahan origin of the Indo-Herats withthe rejoinder to Charles Ellis. "If... all the

red-ground floral rugs, which appear so

frequently in Dutch paintings, are Indian,what were those Persian carpets whichwere available in suchgreat quantities to a

Dutchmerchant inankrdianport inthethirddecade of the 17th cenhuy?"

I do not believe this question addresses

the issue. I know of no argument thatPersian carpets did not exist on the Indianmarket in the 17th cenhry, and they are

mentioned as early as Sir Thomas Roe'saccount.r2 My point is that they could nothave corstituted a sub$antial fractionof the

total Indian hade in carpts when weconsider the literally hundreds ofreferences to Indian carpts containedwithin the British East krdia Companyrecords alone. As we noted above, these

34 Oriental Rug Heview

also refer at times to Portuguese and Dutchtradepattems as well.

Consequently, we might rephrase thequestion. If all the vast nurnber of carpets

shipped from India by the Portuguese,

Dutch, and British arenotthce thathaveappeared in Dutch paintings, Portuguesechurches, and Spanish inventories, thenwhere are they?

The Appearance of Certain Typesof Carpets in Miniature Paintings

The evidence here seens straightforwardand, tome, convincing, althoughithasbeeninterpreted differently by others. Both the

Hamza NamnmdtheAl<bar Nam4'3 thetwo great ilhstratedbooks ofA}bar'sreign,clearly show the use of carpets that closelyresemble the Indo-Herats. There are the

same scrollingvines, palmettes, andborderstripes that characterize this grouP,occasiorally withschvariantsasmedallios,that occur but rarely on surviving Indo-Herats. Thevisualevidenceisunequivocal,however, and creates a problem for those

who argue for a Persian provenance.Spulrler'a solves this expeditiously,

rer;ogruzng that carpets in the miniahresshow the desigrlexicon of the Indo-Herats,but insisting that Akbar was using"Persian" carpets or "Persian style"carpets. The idea that the carpeG could notbekrdianappeansofirrnly imbeddedinhismindthathe seems tofeelnoneed tojustifysuch a contrary conclusion, which is, on itssurface, less plausible ttran the possibilirythe carpets were local producG.

Moreover, the Indo-Herat designelements are too profrrse to igrore. In the

Hatnzp Nama suchdesigns occur onhorsehappings, shields, arrow quivers, and

numerous garments. The die-hardbelieverin a Persian origin could, presumably,explain away these objects as more Persian

imports, butwhat about the great stripes ofIndo-Herat style design on the buildings?(Figures I 8 andl 9) Iurgethose interestedinthis questionto take the touble of findinga copy of ilte H an ua N ama huge also that

the reader keep in mind, while reviewingthe multiple uses of Indo-Herat design inthese paintings, that they were completedin about 157 2,26 y easbefore Shah Abbasmovedhis capital to Isfahan. The Persian

origintheoriss can cormterwitha claimthatthe Moghul school of painting wasfoundedby imported Persian artists. By the time ofAkbar, however, this atelier includedrecruits fr om srnallerlndian courts, and the

painters b,rought by Humayun were nolonger active. Without serious question,

the Hamza Nama reflects the style ofAkbar's court.rs

Figure 18. Scene from llle Hamza Nama,

c. 1 572. Not only do ve see a dorne with strapwo rkornannenmtio4 but aprojtsion of " borde r st ripes "

consistentwith the Indo-Herat design lexicon. The

carpet on thc rightshows Indo-Herat elements in the

flea

The Persian origin notion seems all the

more tenuous when we carefully read the

accowtt of Abul Fazl, Akbar's biogapher,who describes Akbar's establishment ofcarpet weaving in his empire:16

[Akbar] caused carpets to be made ofwonderfrrl] varieties and charmingtextures; he has appointedexperienced workmen who haveproduced many masterpieces. Thecalpets of kan and Turan are no morethought of, although merchants stillimport carpets from Goshkan,Khuzistan, Kerman, and Sabsawar.

All kinds ofcarpetweavers are settled

here, and drive a flourishing hade.

These are to be found in every town,especiallyAgn, Fatehpur, and lahore.kr the imperial workshops, singlecarpets are made 20 gaz,7 tassujes

long, and 6 gaz, Il-ll2tassuiesbroadat a cost of 1810 rupees, which those

who are skilled in business have

valued at 2715 rupees.Takyahnamads, or woolen carPets

[elt] are still brought from Kabul and

Persia, butare alsomadeinthis country.

Itwould take toomuch timeto describe

thejajams,shafiingis,baluchis, andthe

fine mats which look as if woven withsilk

This simple comment has been interpreted

bymanytomeanthatAkbarb,roughtPersianweavers to begin his indtstry, although itdoes not eY $, and we do not need to

l

tI

Figure 19. Scene from lhe Eamza Nama'

The carpet depicted here appears to be an Indo-

He rat type, whilc the architectural decor, as in so

much of the Hamza Nama, is I nade up oJ the xtne

elements.

imagine that rug weaYing was Previously*Lo* in India. Most of the northem

regions ruled by Akbar had for centuries

bein trnder Moslem ddmhation, primarily

by Turkic led invadersfrom CentralAsia'

Duarte Barbosa,rT whose account was

before Babru's arrival in krdia'The Abul Fazl cornment alsomakes no

How likely are they tobe IsfahanPrducts,whenboth of the majorbooks date before

Isfahanbecame Shah Abbas's capital?

Earlier Moghul miniatures, such as the

H anun Nantq shownothing of the angular

striPes*Royal

's artist

Bal Chand, about 1654. This shows a grand

Indo-Herat border stripe with an apparent

a cor.utesan (about 1630).18

Ifthere are any Isfahanminiahres show-

ing Indo-Herat carpts, I have not seen

them, although there is surely no shortage

of decor su gge$ive of the strapworkcarpets

onPersiantents in anwnberof miniahres'2r

Anice piece of "shapwork" can also be

found orra textile depicted or one of the

but seems related in color and design to the

strapwork carPets.

Structural AnalYsisIn addition to the weftfeatures mentioned

above that distinguish the Polonaise and

Indo-Herat carpets, it shouldbe mentioned

that a small grouP of rugs with metal

brto

these are Inde'Herats, but the interesting

feature for our study is their structural

differences fr om the Polonaise pieces. The

metal th,read is wound differently, and the

brocading is of a different fype' The metal

thread on these pieces is worked over one

andunder one of the top layer of warps' On

the Polonaise caq)ets, the metal thLread is

worked over three upper warps and under

one,orattimesit isovertwoanduldertwo'If the Indo-Herats were woven inlsfahan,

why would not the metal brocaded

examplesbe structurally thesameas onthe

Polonaise pieces?

The Problem of LabelsHendley, in his Asian Carpts of 1906,23

described the large accumulation of carpets

indicating their date ofpurchase, place ofmanufachre, price, dimensiors, and dates

specifically as having been woven inlahore, the most common sit'e of origin on

the labels and one of the larown locations

of Moghulweaving.In the meantime, however, it has become

clear that there are language problems, and

non-westem units of measurement were

used. While most of these labels seem to

pertain to the carpets to which they are

attached (the carpets show measurements

corsistent with those on the labels), there

are some that obviously do not refer to the

carpet to which they are now associated'

Whilelhavenotheardthelabels challenged

aspossibleforgeries, Iamawarethatspecifi c

labels have obviously been inconectly

attached to particular rugs' At times the

dimersiorsoftherugandthoseonthelabeldonotmatch, andit isreasonableto assume

that there has been a mistake.

Bennett, however, makes a broad,

origin in lahore mears that such pieces

were purchased in that city, not necessarily

that ttrey were woven there."

Sofar as I am aware, this isnot "known"

at all, and I believe it needs support to have

1978 and 1979, I discussed the matter with

the Director of the Ciry Palace Museum,

Mr. A.K. Das, and he clearly interpreted

thelabelsasreferringto an ori gin in l-ahore.

When I discussed the matter with May

Beattie, who studied these rugs in great

detail morethan a decadebeforemy visit to

Jaipw, she conceded that some of the

labels were problematic but accepted the

ideathatcarpetslabeled asmade in l-ahore

were woven there. Indeed, I would be

interested inleamingwho "knows" that the

labels do not referto a Lahore origin' I am

awarethatduringthelastfew decades, most

outsiders have been allowed to see only

the small fraction of the Jaipur carpels on

public display, as most of them have been

k+ i" secure storage for reasons related

to local politics and taxes' What high

powered scholars have recently seen them

and concluded that thelabels do not mean

whatthey saY?

In the meantime, unless Mr. Bennett can

comeup withsomething stronger, Ibelieve

itreasonableto attachsomemeanin g to the

Iabels. Thosethatmatch in dimensions the

carpets to which they are attached, and

refer to a lahore origin, should be given

appropriate weight in our attemPt to

determine where these carpets were

woven.Jails snd l-ater Comntercial Rugs

In our discussion of the Indo-Herats, we

have pretty much left behind the carpets

withstiffer, angular designs (Frg ures 8 andllerats,

TJexplanation as to how they relate to the

Indo-Herats.We also nrn across a really insidious

problem in tying to distinguish between

Oriental Rug Review 35

n

these carpets and later examples woven inthejails and commercial looms of the 18th

and lgth centuries. The later and coarserjail carpets can often be distinguished at a

glance by the weaker reds, perhaps froma lower concentration of lac dye, or to suitthen-curent British tastes in decor. Wherewe have greater diffrculty is with suchpieces as Figure 9, which shows naturalcolor and a design compatible with known17th century pieces. When such a piece is

foundtohave7- or 8-plycottonwarps, whatare we to think? Are these warP Yamshandspun or machine-sptur? We know thatthe standardlndo-Heratrug is wovenon4-ply cottonwarps.

Fortunately, the shucture of the rypicallgthcenhryjailrugis well documented. Ithas been described in detail several times,

mostthorougtrlyby Hendley,2a who quotes

a memo from Dr. W. Dickson,superintendent of the Central Jail at I-ahore,

as tothewaycarpetswereordinarilywovenunder his jwisdiction, and presumably inotherjails and commercial establishments

aswell. Themiddle gradeof carpet,with 12

lcrots to the inch of warp (about 144 knotsper square inch) was woven on wa4x ofNo. 16 English thread, 8 fold; the packingweft wasofNo. 10thread, 10fold; whilethethin wefu were No. 10,2 fold, untwisted.The pile yam was made up of "country

wool, goodqualiry, 2fold, untwisted." The16 laiot per inch carpets (about 256 lmotsper square inch) were described as beingon warps of No. 1 6 Englishtlread, 7 fold.25

Now I believe this has some bearing onthe rugs with more angular designs.

Although a small minority of these pieces

have 4-ply warps (including one of the twopieces of this type I formd at Jaipur), the

36 Oriental Rug Review

Figure 21, Portrait of Jahangir

holding a picture oJ his father,Akbar, painted by Abul Hmn, c.

1 5 99 - 1 60 5. Whib t he fab r ic be neat h

Jahang i r's ar m is I ike ly a ve lve t, t he

strapwork is suggestive oJthatJound on

the carpets.

great majority of them l:,ave 7- or S-plycotronwarps thatlbelieveare of themachine

spun No. 16 English thread described

above. Figrue9 comes intothis category,

as does a piece published by Ellis from the

Philadelphia Museum of Art26 andnumerous other examples.

I have always suspected that rugs with 7-and S-ply warps, in using what I believe tobe machine-spun thread, could not date

before the last decades of the 1 8th century,

whenthismaterialbecameavailable inlndia.These cotton threads can be distinguishedfromhandspunwork, inmy opinion, by the

uniformiry of the individual strands, and Iam unconvinced that there has ever been

a cotton spinning indushy based on hand

labor in which yams of more than three,

four, or five plies are routinely produced'

An S-ply handspun piece of cotton twinewould seem to represent nearly double the

amount of work for no advantage.(lhe carpets thatmost immediately call

this formulation into question are those

thought to datefrom the period of Jahangir,

withrealistic floral fi guresonared ground,

Figure 23. Floral and animal

carpet, probably l6th centurY,

1 0' I 0'x24' 1 1'. Thb is one of the so-called

Emperor's carpets, apairshared by the

Metropolilan Museum of An and the

Arctrian MreeumJor Applied Arts. It bwove n o n a s i lkfo undot ion, wilh 3 2 3

Pe rsinn knots to the square inch Although

these carpe*, and seve ral othe r obvio usly

rehtedpieces, have usmllY been

attibuted to P e rsia, mostfreq ue nt ly

Herat, I believe they are ancestral to the

connnon Indo-Herals and were woven in

India profubly at the ritne of Akbar.

There are sim ilar disp hys ofc loudbands

and palmettes in earlY Moghu L

a r c hit e c tu re, and seve r al 1ni nti ngs ofAkbar'stirne show carpets with all these

features exceptJor the animab

a number of which were woven in unusr-ral

shapes. Butthatis anotherstoryfor another

dav.)Inmy opinion, dating thesepieces with

7- atd S-pty warps as later provides a

plausible explanation asto why they differfromtheusuallndo-Herats. They were, forthe most part, simply later rugs, and they

blend imperceptibly with the jail and

commercial products of the lfth century.

There is another coherent explanationas well, based on the possibiliry that these

pieces are simply products of other centers

than those weaving the bulk of the Indo-

Herats. After all, we know from Moghuldocuments of weaving in Agra, Fatipur, and

[-ahore, and British commercial documents

mention carpet weaving in Patna, Surat,

Cambay,Ellore, andothercities. Weshouldnot expect these carpets tobe identical, jwtaswewouldnot expecttheoutputof Persian

citiestobeall alike.So when we encounter carpets th at m atch

the struchrral description reported above

by Dr. Dickson, must we necessarily see

them as carpets from the late 18th or 19th

centuries? Although I have frequentlyseen such pieces described by dealers as

the genuine 17th cenh-rry article, I feel most

Icautious about them' Here the buyer must

beware. Figure t has been accepted as

What are we to think?Why The Isfahan Label Survives

Perhaps the most unfortr'urate part of the-

whole conhoversy around the origin ofthese carpets relates to commercial

considerations. For a variety of subjective

more prestigious than that of Lahore or

Agra, andrug dealers will ordinarily employ

hLh that place their merchandise in the

probably imported (mostly from Portugal)

and soldmore of theserugs inAmerica than

anyoneelse. SimitarlyF.R. Martin,t'owhom

Mr. Bennett attributes the Herat label for

sincere, they both choose the name that

placeamongthemost sublime everto leave

theloom.The "Emperor's caq)ets," that formerly

Vienna (Figure 23). While these pieces

share the same red field, blue-greenborder

color format, and the same basic design

elements as the Indo-Herats, their fine

weave (about 350 knotsper inch),silkwarps,

and masterfr.rlly intricate desi gnhave almost

universally prompted a Persian attribution,

usually to Herat. Indeed, even Charles

Grant Ellis, whom Mr. Bennett sees as

epitomizing thelndianorigin theory for the

."d fi"la rugs, does not believe they are

Indian.I believe they are Indian, probably fron-r

theperiodofAkbar, andmorethan 10years

ago in Chinese and Exotic Rugs I gave my

r""tort. I have been disappointed that so

far I have received no rebuttals, and

welcome this opportunity to invite such a

debate. What I am saying is that the finest

Moghul carpets are every bit as successful

.. tt-," n',".ipersian pieces, which should

notbeatall surprisingfrom the far wealth ier

Moghul court.WiU not some venturesome reader take

up the other side and join me for an

argument?

1. Erdmann, Kurt, "The Pattern Structure of

the Arabesque Carpets," Survey of Persian

z4rr, A.U. Pope, editor, Ashiya, SOPA, 1977'

Vol. XW, pp.3160-3166'

2. Watt, George ,Indian Art at Delhi, Calc:utta,

Superintendentof GovernmentPrinting' 1906,

4312.3. Cousens, H. Biiapur and is Architecntral

Renairrs,Archeological Survey of lndia, Vol'

X)O(WI,BombaY,1916.4. Eiland, Munay, Chinese and Lrotic Rttgs,

Boston, New York Graphic Society, 1979,pp'

128-163.

5. Pope (Survey, Pl' 1185) published a rug

from the Shrine in Mashad that seems

superficially to resemble the Indo-Herats, but

examination of this carpet shows it to be

substantialty different and probably woven in

NOTEStO.Ibid, p. 17t.rl.Ibid., p.88.12. Roe, oP. cit., P.96.1 3. Gluclq Heinri ch, Die I ndbchen M iniarure n

des Haemzpe Romanzs, Zurich, Amalthea,

1915.

14. Spuhler, F., Oriental Carpe* in the

Musewn of Islanric Art, Berlin' Washington,

Smitlrsonian Institution Press, 1987, p' lM'15. There is probably not a single Sethvid

miniature in which a carpet is represented in

such a way that an actual surviving example

can be identified as the model' The same

problems in perspective and representation of

detail keeps the miniatures of the Hanrza

Nama fromPortraying in full any surviving

Indo-Herat carpet, although the design

features, the palmettes, cloudbands, lancet

leaves, and scrolling vinework are all present'

The border stripes are much better represented,

only here we see carpet border stripes even

more clearly drawn as architectural decor'

One feature that might appear puzzling at first

is the frequent appearance of blue-field catpets

(often with white borders) rather than the red

field examples we know. However' there are

some surviving blue-field carpets of this type

(McMullan's Plate 14, for example), and it

seems likely that elsewhere there has been

some artistic licenso. When the personages

are depicted in red clothing, the artist seems

more inclined to make the background carpet

blue.16. Abul Fazl,z4 in-i-Ak'bari' Because of some

Bloclonann translation (Calcutta, 1873) and

the earlier one of Gladwin, I have consulted a

copy of the original manuscript, of which the

passage quoted is an accurate rendering'

17. Barbosa, Duarte, The Book of Drnrte

Barbosa...Contpleted abou the year 1518

A.D., 2 vols., edited bY Mansel Datnes,

London, Hakluyt Society, 191 8, p 141'

18. Welch, Stuart Cary, ,4 Flower frou Every

Meadow, New York, The Asia Society, 1973,

[email protected]. Kuhnel, Emst, The Minor Arts of Islartt'

Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 197 1, Plates

I and 33.

20.Ibid., p. t29.

21. Grube,Emest,The Wo rld oflslarrr, l-ondon;

Hamlyn, 1966, P. 127 , 145.

22. Ereattie, May, The Thyssen Bornentisza

Collection of Oriental fu'1gs, Castagnola,

t972.

23. Hendley, T. H., XW and XWI Century

Designs fron the Jaipur Palaces, I-ondon,

Griggs, 1905.

24. Ibid.,P.325. Dickson indicated that the weft strands on

the coarser carpets were only passed twice,

not mentioning that the finer carpets were

triple wefted. He also described the practice

of dying the wefu blue, which we ktow was

not universal in all the weaving establishrnent

at that time.

26. Ellis, Charles G., Oriental Rtt'gs in tlrc

Philadelphia Museurrt o/,{rr, Philadelphia,

Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1988, Plate 65'

another location.

6. Torres, Jose Ferrandis, Catalogo de la

Expos ic io n de Alfumbras Antiqtos Espano Las,

Madrid, 1933, PP. 59-96.

7. The Embassy of Sir Thonns Roe to India:

1615-19, Sir William Foster, editor' London,

Oxford University Press, 1926' Of special

interest is the note (p.352) that Roe brought

home a carPet with his coat of arms,

subsequently left in his will to his cousin, Sir

HenryRoe. So far this carpet has not been

forurd.

8.Ibid,p.450 (n)

9. The iinries of Streynsham Master: 1675-

1680, Sir Richard Camac Temple, editor'

t ondon, John MurraY, 191 1' P' 83'iscrenancv in this between the