Talk:Persian carpet

"Rug" sounds very odd in this context. Doesn't everyone use "carpet"? Isn't a "rug" like a schmata for the floor? Something you roll up and truck about, like a prayer rug. Perhaps "carpet" in middle-class American usage now only denotes a fitted broadloom. --Wetman 21:34, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Carpet and rug are used pretty much interchangably by scholars - see carpet article for distinctions claimed by some. -astragal

The dividing line is considered the two metre mark in the longest side of the piece. Therefore, a six foot by four foot (6x4) piece would be considered a rug, whereas an eight foot by five foot piece (8x5) is considered a carpet. - --latifrugs

Fur further information please look into http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Carpets right at the beginning. --Krisbi2210 (talk) 08:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

"Years ago Amy Carmichael wrote about the incredible process that produces these masterpieces. Try to picture this. There are two sets of workmen sitting on a bench on one side of the carpet which is hanging from a beam up above. The designer stands on the other side; he's holding a pattern in his hand and he directs the workers by calling across to them exactly what they're to do next. It's like a chant actually. And then the workman chants back to the designer the word that he's heard, verifying that order. Then the workman cuts from whatever bobbin has been ordered and he pushes that thread through the carpet warp and he knots it. All he can see is that thread. He sees nothing of the pattern until the carpet is finished."

no. first, carpets don't "hang from a beam" - the warp (vertical) threads are arranged on the loom from top to bottom before weaving is begun. second, ome carpets are woven from a cartoon or design. the range of detail is huge. some of have the pattern worked out to the stitch on graph paper, others are a more general summary of the design. smaller carpets woven outside in more domestic settings are often produced from memory with no cartoon. the corners are a good indication of whether a cartoon was used: a graceful, diagonal, corner solution cannot be acheived without a pattern to follow. in any case, there is no designer on hand: the cartoon is either suspended behind the warp threads (taped to the wall for the example), or a section of the design is tucked into the warp threads so as to be readily visible to the weavers. third, weavers work on the front side of a carpet and can see the design develop as the work progresses. oh, but weavers do often in work in pairs (or more). -Astragal

In fact, a mix is used, depending on the region. The technique described at top - calling out patterns - is used, though mainly in Kashmir. It may not sound too exotic, but neither is weaving off a piece of graph paper (or cartoon) in which the weaver has had no artistic input.

I'm not particularly interested in helping, but someone should try to put accurate links on that list where it's 98% red (nonfuntional) links.

How Wikipedian of you. Of course the reason the links for the classifications of Persian carpets don't work is because no one has written articles on them yet. They are at this point only "potential information." But I'm sure you knew that - you just decided to state the obvious, and make no effort to be part of the solution despite your handle. Thanks!! Astragal 16:31, 22 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

There are two categories relating to rugs: 1. Category:Rugs which is a sub-category of Category:Textile arts which is a sub category of the Categories: Artistic techniques | Art media | Textiles | Crafts | Arts and crafts and 2. Category:Rugs and carpets which is a sub-category of Category:Textiles

I propose to merge Category:Rugs into Category:Rugs and carpets. Please see discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Rugs_to_Category:Rugs_and_carpets --A Y Arktos 21:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi everyone,

I have a web site about Handmade Persian Rugs and there I have two documentary movies which were produced by us (Sobhe Trading Co.) I thought it might be an interesting thing to be added to the Persian Rug page of wikipedia.org. The movies can be find at www.rugidea.com/movies I tried adding it to this page acouple of times but each time, for some reason, it was found as an advertisement for my web site. Please let me know if there is a proper way of adding an external link to wikipedia.org. You may also contact me if you have any questions. ashkan@drsobhe.com

Many thanks,

Ashkan

Wikipedia doesn't generally support external links to commercial websites - see Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:spam for more advice. -- Solipsist 12:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Should Damascus Rug from Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hot/D/Dab-Dar redirect here?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk}  19:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

In the history section there is a sentence-

A number of rugs believed to have been woven by the famous Daddeh family were recently discovered and then auctioned in Agra, India, fetching some of the highest prices ever observed in the rug market.

I moved it from the end of the paragraph that talks about the age of the rug making art since their was no obvious connection. It's still not clear to me why this is here. I presume these are important rugs. It would be great to have a bit more information in the article on why they're important and what the significance of the find is. --Siobhan Hansa 13:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. This paragraph was added recently - it seems likely to be true, but it would help to have a reference and some more background. (Still better than many of the edits we get here). -- Solipsist 14:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Would like to propose external link to article about Persian rugs. It is located at the following url: http://www.oldandsold.com/articles02/article1030.shtml Smithville 00:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've just responded to a similar post from you on another article I'm interested in - and the response is the same. These articles are really not very good. This one in particular seems like a POV, essay on how to buy a rug. In fairly poor English (which isn't the worst thing in the world, but it doesn't help). The adding of the link doesn't seem to serve our readers well. --Siobhan Hansa 04:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

It seems to me that the whole category of tribal rugs is missing from this section. I'm just learning about Persian rugs, but have found the distinctions made at oldcarpet.com useful. Is there any reason not to arrange this section along similar lines? --Philbarker 18:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Persian carpets is the correct term which has been in use for centuries. Encyclopaedia Iranica also recognises the "Persian Carpet" as the scholarly and correct term than "Rug". Persian rug is a subdivision of Persian Carpets. Google search provides:

354,000 entries for Persian Rug (which mainly are commercial websites)

428,000 entries for Persian Carpet (almost half scholarly and research websites)

190.000 entries for Persian Carpets (most of them scholarly and research websites)

I believe People promote to keep "Persian Rug page" have commercial interests, rather educational. ← ← Parthian Shot (Talk) 05:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

PS. The previous article "Persian rug", was POVs, and poorly written with no academic citations to support the entries. ← ← Parthian Shot (Talk) 11:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I agree that this page should not be permanently deleted. I tagged it for history-merge, not permanent deletion (its location can be determined by WP:BRD or by talk-page consensus among people who know about the subject (I don't know much). See your talk page for more information. --ais523 12:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Contributors: Please refrain yourself from adding commercial links to the article. Many of the commercial sites are not literate or educated enough to provide accurate info, which subsequently would undermines the integrity of this article. In addition, it is against Wikipedia policy WP:LINKS. ← ← Parthian Shot (Talk) 06:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

 

The picture entitled "Persian rug in a household setting" was actually made in Turkmenistan. It is a traditional Turkmen design. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.139.80 (talk) 13:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

The image "A Turkmen rug in a household setting" does not fit into the section about Persian Town carpets. Turkmen rugs are typical nomadic rugs, and come from a tradition which is completely different from Persian town carpets. Within the current context, the image does not contibute to a better understanding. I have therefore moved the image to Oriental rugs#Rugs by regions#Turkmen rugs, where it makes a perfect fit.

This may be of help to your article. You may use it if you find it useful:

Rugs are flat (pileless), un-knotted hand-woven textiles used as floor and wall coverings, bags and tent trappings. Unlike carpets, rugs are woven on a loom using vertical warps and horizontal wefts to weave the threads together much as any handmade fabric is woven. Usually the warp (the length of kilim) is made of wool and the weft (the width of kilim) of wool or cotton. The couloured threads are completely woven into the kilim like a basket, making it reversible. Although the face may be distinguished from the reverse, the difference is so slight that either side may be used.

“Kilim”, simply is a flat woven carpet or a kind of rug without any pile or knotted fluff: a coarse, thin hand made carpet. The terms used to describe flatweaves are indeed as varied as the trival weaving groups themselves. Some of the names used to describe flatwoven rugs are “hanbel” in North Africa, in Turkey and Afghanistan it is called “Kilim”, in Ukraine “Palas”, in Caucasia “Liat”, In Syria and Lebanon it is called “Chilim” and in Iran “Gelim”. Today the term ‘KILIM’ has become the known term for a flatwoven rug of any origin, raw materilakm method of construction and pattering. 1 sourde: 1) Kilim – the Compete guide” by Alastair Hull and Jose Luczyk Wyhoweska, page 22 1993 Thaames & Hudson Ltd., London, reprinted 2005

In the past, kilim weaving had an important role in women’s life and it was the major part of their dowry and also a source of income. So brides had to learn this craft; of course, it must be considered, that weaving has only been allocated to woven and yet it is one of their routine tasks of tribe women. Kilims have greatly changed during centuries, i.e., more marriages among different tribes, make different styles mixed together. By the end of 19th century, kilim weaving was damaged by undesired chemical dyes imported form European Countries. It is obvious, that the reasons of kilim weaving have been vastly changed, in recent years; cultural motives and personal usage of weaving gave its place to benefits of trading. A glance at various kilims of different regions, either old or new, shows that the original kilims have their own special place, as before. --Krisbi2210 (talk) 10:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Here are some useful links for profound information:

http://witcombe.sbc.edu/ARTHislamic.html#Islamic http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Carpets with explanation of difference between carpets and rugs

and for fragments: http://www.clemusart.com/explore/department.asp?deptgroup=3&display=list&recNo=125

for history: http://www.lacma.org/islamic_art/emp.htm = Islamic Art at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art best regards from Germany --Krisbi2210 (talk) 08:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

This chapter was copied word by word from [1]without a reference to this page. Because I am a new member I don't know how you cope with this matter. --Krisbi2210 (talk) 12:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Can anyone tell me what the style of the carpet in the article is called (it's in the Islamic section, only the middle part of the carpet is in the picture)? Thank you.

Can someone upload some of the following info concerning the largest carpet made by Iranian weavers for the Zayed mosque. The following is an excerpt from the link provided at bottom:

Authorities in Iran unveiled what they described as the world's largest hand-woven rug at Tehran's open-air prayer grounds.

At 60,546 square feet (5,625 square meters), the carpet is the size of a soccer field and was woven by 1,200 weavers in three villages over the course of a year and a half.

The mammoth floor covering is destined for a monumental new mosque under construction in the United Arab Emirates. Emirati officials commissioned Iran's state-owned rug manufacturer to create the piece for the central prayer hall of the giant Sheikh Zayed mosque, in the capital city of Abu Zaby (Abu Dhabi).

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/08/070801-iran-picture.html

The statement, "Persian carpets are the finest in the world," must be a subjective statement as presented here, as it does not present evaluative or comparative evidence. It should be changed to demonstrate how an why Persian rugs are the finest in the world, or removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.47.4 (talk) 16:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Most of the carpets are not woven, they are knotted. Carpet maker(s) would be a more appropriate term.

One famous Persian carpet is not listed here. The Bijar carpet is known as the "Iron Carpet", because it is made from unusually tough wool. It can stand a lot of heavy traffic and will outlast any owner. I have numerous Persian carpets, my Bijar is right inside the front door. The Bijar is made with 2 wefts, and the pile is very dense so it stands at 90 degrees and does not flatten with usage. Classically, the 2 wefts are of different sizes, the first is very thick with a high twist and applied wet. The second is thinner. Some old Bijar carpets have 3 wefts. Bijar is in the Kurdish region of Persia (Iran), and they speak an unusual Kurdish dialect.Historygypsy (talk) 16:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Isn't there usually an intentional mistake to show it's not perfect (since only Allah is meant to be perfect)? Malick78 (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The That is certainly the case in the more "grander" designs. Hence the saying "the Persian carpet is perfectly imperfect, precisely imprecise." That, and the term for God in Farsi is "Khoda,"[2] as opposed to "Allah," which is the Arabic. The Scythian 23:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Section: Zoroastrian period; penultimate paragraph. Although The Romanised version of the capital city's name "Ctesiphon" has been once mentioned in this section, the final sentence in the paragraph also refers to it as "Tuspawn". Instead of altering it to "Ctesiphon" or "Tisfoon", the common Persian pronunciation, I'm respecting the original for now and am querying the source for this pronunciation, "Tuspawn". — Preceding unsigned comment added by SBader (talk • contribs) 22:35, 11 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Persian carpets are not just more expensive than machine woven carpets because they are "an artistic presentation" but because it requires MORE TIME to produce them by hand than by machine. This holds true for any commodity in the world, value or price of a commodity has very little to do with colours, patterns, and styles because machines can do all of these things in less time and using less resources (i.e. machines dont need food, water, and shelter, nor do they call in sick for work). It is perfectly possible to produce high quality carpets using machinery that also have artistic styles, designs and patterns if not better than the ones weavers produce.

The introduction states that "1.2 million weavers" are found in Iran but in another section it states that "nearly five million workers are engaged in the Iranian carpet industry." This needs further clarification, by "industry" who are you referring to? Industrialists? Company owners? Transporters? Retailers? Workers? All of them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 07:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Seems like we've more than enough images. I think the low-quality and otherwise redundant ones should be removed. --Ronz (talk) 18:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ronz, do you know whats the difference when someone says for example Persian Carpet or Afghan Carpet or Gabbeh? & how someone can distinguish them? KhabarNegar (talk) 20:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I suggest we focus on content and relevant policies, in this case MOS:IMAGES. --Ronz (talk) 21:19, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I mean the design of carpets are different. and some of the design are specifically for Persian Carpet, and some are for example for Afghan Carpets and so on... You know, so I think that may give some information about the article. Yours sincerely, KhabarNegar (talk) 21:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Of course images are not redundant if they clearly show major differences in design noted in the article. --Ronz (talk) 17:26, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

You are very wrong if you think the number of images here is too high for an inherently visual subject. There isn't even a gallery, and surprisingly few of carpet designs. But some of the images may not be the best choices, as in any article. I'd say images are the least of this article's problems. Johnbod (talk) 17:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

No one is arguing that. I'm arguing that we follow the relevant policies, and remove poor quality and redundant images.

Yes, the article could use a gallery, if it actually presented notable design differences. Instead what we have far too much of are poor quality images. --Ronz (talk) 20:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I agree none of the individual ones showing designs are much good, except the long narrow one, and the 5th century BC rug should be kept, as that really is special. Have a go by all means. Johnbod (talk) 21:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I’m not sure too, because I'm not a Carpet specialist :). The only thing I know is that the designs are one of the main things that help distinguish them. And I guess those design are for Persian Carpet. Thank for reading this. KhabarNegar (talk) 11:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I think that's a good idea for article to have a gallery at the end, OK you may transfer them into gallery part. Its better to keep all of them even if they are low quality ones, till better images where available and then anyone can replace them with better images. KhabarNegar (talk) 11:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

The article states "However, it is believed that the carpet from Pazyryk is not likely a nomadic product, but a product of the Achaemenid period.[17]", with the reference "Lerner J., Some Achaemenid Objects from Pazyryk,Source, vol. X, no. 4:8-15 (1991), p. 12.". Unfortunately, the real title of the reference is actually "Some So-called Achaemenid Objects from Pazyryk". Willful misrepresentation or sloppy copy-paste might be to blame. The origins of the Pazyryk carpet are less certain than the statement, based on references including the cited one, although some Achaemenid influence is generally agreed upon. Article will be amended to reflect this. Enozkan (talk) 01:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

The article contains a lot of valuable information (including modern carpet production), but I believe it could be re-arranged, more detailed information might be added, and, overall, the article might benefit from better references. I've added a "see also" to Oriental rugs for comparison. Any opinions?HajjiBaba (talk) 09:57, 3 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

go to it! Johnbod (talk) 14:05, 3 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

This section contains essentially incorrect information. The asymmetrical "Persian" knot is not woven around one single warp, but around one warp, and halfway around the adjacent (see images in "knots"). Spanish, and some koptic rugs, use single-warp knots. The error probably comes from confusing the technique of knotting with the technique of "depressed warps" (see image in "knots"). When depressed warps are used in a carpet, only one half of the knot is visible from the backside of a rug. The entire knot still goes around two wefts, though.

Turkish carpets (esp. village and nomadic ones) are often more coarsely woven than Persian carpets. However, what is termed a "slightly more block like image" in the section discussed here (probably alluding to rectilinear design and stylization?) results from a different design tradition, and represents an active decision made by the weaver. As exemplified, e.g., by Persian Senneh or Tabriz carpets, very fine rugs can be woven with symmetric knots.

Hope this explains why I've deleted the section. It's certainly not meant to be "vandalism". HajjiBaba (talk) 12:22, 5 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

The section on "Designs, motifs, and patterns" contains only material from unverified sources ("research by the Iranian carpet company"). It appears that the section provides an unsystematic list of various design patterns. I am unclear about terms such as "intertwined fish patterns", "derivative patterns", "interconnected patterns", which, IMO, are useless to the average reader without any further explanation.

The most important, and distinguishing, patterns have been dealt with in a new section, using "rug book" terminology, substantiated by verified sources, and illustrated by images from WM Commons. If, by deleting this section, I have involuntarily deleted relevant information, I'd like to suggest that anyone who has more information about specific patterns may want to add this to the new section on "Design".HajjiBaba (talk) 09:58, 15 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

According to Speicherstadt:

As of 2005, the companies in the Speicherstadt handled one-third of the world's carpet production,

--Error (talk) 23:18, 15 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

"Materials" ([26]Edwards wrong) ""'Camel wool is occasionally used in Persian nomadic rugs. It is often dyed in black, or used in its natural colour. More often, wool said to be camel's wool turns out to be dyed sheep wool.[26]""" - - - ACTUALLY: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/baluchistan-v """Camel hair is sometimes woven into the niches (meḥrāb) of Baluch prayer carpets. These rugs are less somber, even occasionally light in ground color. The idea that this material is actually wool dyed with walnut husks (Edwards, p. l86) is incorrect; it is undyed camel hair.""

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:581:4300:4A74:3467:EBB9:DE06:F240 (talk) 01:23, 25 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Mehmoonifinal2.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Pazyryk Carpet.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:25, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

It seems someone just copied the "qali-ye farsi" for the second entry "qali-ye irani", which I'm certain should have a different pronunciation written 2601:240:CD05:59DB:C0B7:3BE6:7E1B:B22C (talk) 22:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tabriz Lilac.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20171206-the-timeless-appeal-of-the-persian-rug Nusrat Jahan 201999 (talk) 09:00, 29 June 2023 (UTC)Reply