Turkmen Chodor Juval Rugs & Carpets
17th Century Mangyshlak Chodor Chuval
Size: 125cm(H) x 79cm(W) / 4'1"(H) x 2'7"(W)
Region: Central Asia, Turkmen
Materials: Wool with camel wefts
Structure / Technique: Pile, asymmetric knot open right
Notes: Near complete with folded and sewn top. Pile is good but uneven. Two or three very small moth tracks. Some of the very top is missing. A few small urine dribbles in the elem and three very, very small holes.
Full Description: This is a speculators' dream. It is either an exceptional 19th century Caspian Chodor or it is 17th century Mangyshlak Chodor.
There are a number of reasons why it could be from the 19th century. Primary among these is that most Turkoman weavings are from this era. Secondarily, at a glance it looks pretty much like a normal (19th century) Turkoman weaving. Certainly there are Caspian Yomuds with a similar palette, the gul is drawn like a normal Chodor gul, the borders and secondary gul are familiar or at least known. So why look any further? Well, because some of us are Turkomaniacs. Looking deeper is second nature.
Upon closer inspection, a number of details are found to be atypical. First, the secondary sarkhalka border: It's just not like the other girls. Compare it with other Chodor or Saryk versions; it just doesn't match. This particular rendition appears to be unique. We know the main border to be both common and archaic. After all, it is common to the Afshar and they haven't been much of a presence in Central Asia since the Seljuk movements. It is typical for 19th century Chodor and Yomut work. But once again, upon close inspection we find that this articulation to be very different.
The horizontal aspects look elongated and squashed, late even, but when one reads the reciprocal (white) aspect the border takes on a whole new meaning. The vertical versions of this border are textured or 'spotted' like the bodies of dragons and other mythical beasts in early carpets. If we read the figurative design to be birds or phoenix then perhaps we might attempt to extrapolate the textured reciprocal into dragons. Not too far-fetched. The gul itself is very good but it certainly doesn't vary much from other early 19th century nine gul Chodor chuvals except in one category: color. The others don't come in this palette. Indeed the colors are very unusual for Chodor work and quite exceptional for any Turkoman tribe.
Finally, the structure. The warps are on one plane, not depressed, like the few examples that we know to be Mangyshlak. The knot count appears to be a bit high for Chodor work also. Certainly not a completely convincing argument but one does wonder as to exactly what is the explaination for this unusual chuval. Sooner or later it will have to be submitted to science.
Chodor Juval, Mangyshlak Peninsula
This piece was published in Kurt Munkacsi's groundbreaking article "Dividing the Chodor" Hali 77 October 1994. It eventually passed into the collection of the esteemed German rug dealer Bertram Frauenknecht.
Please note the Rams Horn device on the bottom of the bottom row of tridents.
Chodor Juval, West Turkestan, Late 19th Century
Size: 105cm. by 82cm., 3ft. 5in. by 2ft. 8in.
Chodor Juval, West Turkestan, c.1890
Size: 119cm. by 73cm., 3ft. 11in. by 2ft. 5in. and 133cm. by 83cm., 4ft. 4in. by 2ft. 9in.
Description: Together with an Ak Juval.
Chodor Juval Fragment
Origin: West Turkistan, mid-19th century
Size: 3 ft. 6 in. by 2 ft. 10 in. (107 cm by 86 cm)
Warps: Wool, Z2S, ivory/ash/dark brown mix
Weft: Wool, Z1, and cotton Z1, (Z2), 2 shoots, wool - ash or brown; cotton - white
Pile: Wool, asymmetrical knots open to the right
Density: 8h 9 – 10v
Sides: Not original
Ends: Upper - incomplete
Lower - 1/2 in. stripped kilim of blue, red and brown, then 3/4 in. ivory kilim turned under and sewn.
Colors: Aubergine, sienna red, indigo, lapis, ivory, chamois, light ochre, beaver, walnut