Orthodoxy and Heresy - Knotted Symbology

This short essay was the base of the Presentation held in the Sartirana Textile Show, September 2015.

1 - Cairene prayer rug, 1550 circa, Al Sabah coll. Kuwait

2 - Safavid niche rug, 1550 circa, Fletcher bequest, The Metropolitan Museum,  New York

Most obviously the art of a period happens to reflect its spirit, at times it even seems to voice it.

In the case of Oriental Carpets we are often facing compound images in which the complexity of history appears to imbue any single knot and pattern.

During our ruffled journey throughout rugs we have encountered two pieces whose designs are so poignantly conceived as to appear conveying a cypher. They are the Cairene-Ottoman 'prayer' rug held in the Al Sabah collection, Kuwait, and the Safavid Fletcher 'niche' rug conserved at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Both are attributed to the mid 16th century.

Despite the fact that they have been thoroughly studied over time, their beauty still shines and marks a break-through in the weaving tradition of their countries and, indeed, a distinctive meaning may have been grafted in their patterns. Might some period circumstance explain the unique aura charging these two exemplars?

The second quarter of the 16th century saw increasing conflict between the two Islamic empires. The war began with the drastic defeat of Shah Ismail Safavid at Chaldiran (1514) and ended with the Peace of Amasya (1555) and a relatively good agreement for the Iranian part which had territorial authority recognised.

Politically much depended on the outcome of the conflict since the rise of the Safavid power in 1501 was threatening the international authority of the Ottomans and as well the internal solidity of the empire. The rise of a Shi' ite dynasty, in fact, would have diminished the just gained role of supreme Caliph of the Muslim world not to speak of the economic benefits this brought with it.

3-Disputed territories by Safavids and Ottomans

Likewise, it was in danger of triggering revolts from some heterodox groups living in the vast territory which struggled to accept a centralised control.

Various groups: Sufis, Shi'ites and Alevis were, in fact, undermining the solidity of the empire since its beginning. Finally, after alternating periods of tolerance and massacres Suleiman the Magnificent decided to eradicate these sects already declared heretical by Selim I. Practises were prohibited and new congregational mosques built to control the loyalty of the believers. These buildings aimed to represent a newly proclaimed Sunni orthodoxy against the heterodox rituals held in the urban charitable convents of Sufis and Shi'ites (zawjia mosques) as well as in the rural sacred houses of gathering of the Alevis (cemevi).

4-Bursa, charitable complex of the Great Mosque, 1396-99

5-Alevis cemevi, sacred house of gathering

Since the Seljuk period (1081-1307 roughly) sheyks and believers of Turkmen origin coming from Central Asia and Khurasan had adopted mystic versions of Islam which better reflected their ancient pre-Islamic roots. There were likewise a number of militant groups collectively termed Qizillbash leaning towards the Safavid Shi'ism as leading guide.

On the other hand the new congregational mosques built by the architect Sinan from the mid 16th century onward (more than 400 hundreds are recorded) were intended to officially proclaim the Holy Book as the only source of faith by means of centralised plan and inscriptions. They illustrated that only the Sunni law could guarantee the final reward (Heaven) to the pious and righteous.

It should be no surprise if rugs were purposely woven and conceived with the same conceit  in a court laboratory inspired by this aim.

The Al Sabah rug in this respect really seems to adhere to the new religious policy for it literally applies a Quran's sura where an architectural niche is called the symbol of God and a lamp hanging from the vault the divine light guiding to Heaven.

6-Quran's sura, in W. B. Denny, How to read Islamic carpets, The Metropolitan, 2014

If compared with earlier extant prayer rugs from Anatolia, the lush decorative ornamentation does not invalidate the two essential features described in the sura. Any other sign would seem unnecessary to the real understanding of the message and might be considered misleading and related to heterodox practises.

It is indeed impossible to reject the hypothesis that earlier prayer rugs (plate 7, 8, 9) could also reflect the complexity of Islam inherited earlier times. Many enclaves of Sufism, Shi'ism and Alevis were spread throughout  the numerous Turkmen population, mainly in the late Anatolian beyliks and in far distant regions of the empire. Yet, a rooted stronghold was represented as well in the core  by the Bektashi Sufi brotherhood. It is thought that such mystic brotherhoods embedded their original pre-Islamic beliefs in the structure and formalities of Islam and, obviously, they best flourished prior to the new religious policy.

Thus, some devices depicted in early rugs can be plausibly related to this inclusive religious context. Abstraction by means of geometry, talisman-like designs and 'odd' patterns (patterns difficult to explain such as the one in the 'Bellini' type and others) could likely express an embedded symbolism. That said, they did not stop to be woven because of the orthodox purge but now appeared intermittently.  Likewise  heterodox beliefs were hardly evicted from the whole territory.

7-Anatolian saf, 15th, TIEM, Istanbul

8-Anatolian  saf, 15th, TIEM, Istanbul

9-Anatolia, 'Bellini' prayer rug, late 15th, Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin

Nonetheless, despite the scarce number of replicas, the Al Sabah rug did long influence later regional output beginning from  some 'Transylvanian' rugs, and thereafter originating a steady river crossing fashions and periods.

10-Late 'Transylvanian' prayer rug, early 18th, The Walter Art Museum, Baltimore

11-The Fletcher Safavid niche rug

On the other side the Fletcher rug was woven in what wished to become a Shi'ite state.

The specific Shii'ism of the Twelver Imam was proclaimed state religion by Shah Ismail I when he was enthroned in Tabriz, 1501.

The first half of the 16th century saw the Safavids, originally raised a powerful Sufi brotherhood, trying to deal with the composite religious panorama of the reign. Despite the large majority of the population of Sunni belief, Iran was scattered with many millenarian mystic sects adhering to Sufism and Shi'ism in extremist guises.

The Safavids, and Ismail mostly, were taken advantage of the enthusiastic loyalty of the Sufi extremism proved by the Turkmen Qizillbash, who assisted in  several military campaigns. But their aim was to establish  the Twelver Shi'ism not quite conforming with such extremism. They aimed as well to incorporate the Persian notables in the bureaucracy and eradicate the religious connotation of the royal army. Twelver Shi'ism and Persian culture were, in fact, the two keys able to create a new national identity, distinct from other Muslim and Turkmen reigns.

Ismail and Thamasp had, thus, to fight against heterodox doctrines, whilse appeasing some, and also defend the claim to the Twelver Shi'ism declared heresy by the Ottoman Sultan, supreme Caliph of all Muslims.

Aside the fact that, unlike the Sunnite Ottoman, the Shi'ite empire did not seemingly develop a steady tradition for prayer rugs (see here 'The Niche, The Rug and The Throne'), the Safavid woven art introduced in the mid of the 16th century a large group of rugs patterned with a niche. The Fletcher seems to be the first of them. A most recent research attributes it to the beginning of the Qazvin period, the period of Qazvin capital (1548-1597), during which many similar 'niche rugs' were woven, usually grouped into the so-called Salting carpets.

Arts were already blossoming in the Safavid court of Tabriz.Yet, again, this design does not appear in the distinguished group of extant rugs attributed to the Tabriz period, the period of Tabriz first capital (1501-1547). Nonetheless, the Ottomans are known to have pillaged the Blue Mosque of Tabriz, 1541, taken rugs there held to Istanbul and thrown them on the floor of the Sultan's harem to be trashed with contempt. Who knows if 'niche rugs' were amid that booty and what designs they depicted.

The Salting type design of the Fletcher fairly diverges from the type of 'prayer rugs' previously painted in Persianate art.

12-14th/15th miniature, Persianate art

Aside the floral decoration properly matching the period Safavid style, the design displays some unique characteristics, namely the unrestrained inscriptions in borders and spandrels, and the subtly non architectural layout.

Quite curiously, the content of the inscriptions much differs from others in the group, inasmuch it refers only quotes from the Holy Book and invocations to the Almighty. Conversely, many of the Salting type are described as bearing also quotes from Persian poetry, historical texts, hadeeths, invocations to Ali and the Twelver.

It is known that the Safavid Twelver Shi' ism at the time had not a proper jurisprudence. Not one text on Shi' ite doctrine was found in Tabriz nor in other Iranian cities. As a consequence foreign jurists were invited to come and set a proper doctrine which yet was definitely established during the reign of Shah Abbas I (1587-1629).

One of the usual charges against the Safavids was their disrespect for and neglect of the Holy Book, as shown during the embassy receptions when Persian ambassadors could hardly reply to the constant questions on religious concerns. 

The significance of the Fletcher rug, filled with quotes of the Quran, may be clarified in this very context, for its displays, perhaps quite deliberately,   a strong claim to knowledge of Islam and the Holy Book . Not otherwise, in the occasion of the peace of Amasya (1555) the Shah made a point of presenting, among other lavish gifts, a fabulously copied Quran, itself a  noticeable proof of knowledge and respect concerning religious matters.

Such display of pageantry was accordingly suited to the cautious, splendid and grandiloquent words addressed to the Ottoman Padishah; indeed it was a most active agent in diplomatic negotiations where some ideological subtleties could have been conveyed only by these works of art.

14-The Paris Salting niche rug, Qazvin period

In turn, some of the Salting niche rugs are thought to have been amid the lavish gifts presented by Shah Thamasp in 1568 and 1574 to the newly elected Sultan Selim II and Murad III. Unsurprisingly, they bear some declarations of the Shi' ite doctrine as formalised in those years. Safavid diplomacy became accordingly more audacious, and the gorgeously painted Shahanameh of Shah Thamasp presented to Selim II was plausibly intended to illustrate the superiority of Persian culture as much as it was an endorsement of  Twelver Shi' ism.

13-The Karlsruhe Salting niche rug, Qazvin period

Quite interestingly, a comparison with the woven inscriptions is to be found in the two mosques Shah Abbas I had built in Isfahan, his new capital (1558-1622). The new monarch dramatically reversed diplomatic relations with the historical enemy from the appeasing behaviour of Shah Thamasp. Abbas also decided to resolve the controversies by recruiting a new pool of foreign jurists to conceive a definitive Shi'ite jurisprudence. This would have completely legitimised his right to rule over the Shia and his empire. And, the Shi'ite believers would have finally had their 'Supreme Caliph' and right to exist within the Islamic world.

The jurists, again, sourced the doctrinal pillars from Persian poetry, historical texts and hadeeths. The unrestrained long inscriptions on the tiled walls of the Lotfollah and the Shah mosque (respectively built 1603-1619 and 1611-1631) adding with invocations to Ali, the Infallibles and the Shah constitute indeed a theological treatise.

Ultimately, on the Lotfollah mosque mihrab the perfect loyalty to Ali is claimed to be the real prerequisite to enter Jannah (Heaven) .

15- Lotfollah mosque, mihrab, early 17th

As regarding the last characteristic of these rugs, the niche, a little investigation may shed more light on the complex scenario of the period.

The specific shape (a narrow neck opening in a drop-like vault possibly three lobed) is not usually found as a mihrab type in both Anatolian and Iranian. architecture. Conversely, it is a common motif gracing Timurid tile revetments from the 14th century onward (plate 16). Furthermore, its lobed shape may remind the Asian cloud collar motif (plate 17), a circle with four similar protruding forms, which is thought to represent the Sky-Gate, the equivalent to the Islamic Doorway to Jannah. Interestingly enough, the artist did not chose an 'architectural niche' as devised in the Quran's sura, but a design which could mingle such diverse contents.

Indeed the early ideology of the Safavid monarchy combined Sufi, Shi'ite and eschatological ideas. The Shah claimed to be and was regarded as the Hidden Imam, the Redeemer of the Islamic History or his Deputy with unlimited worldly and supernatural powers. As well Ismail and Thamasp tried to present themselves in the Persian traditional way as the Shadow of God on the Earth. That said, this multiple sacred symbology, God-Redeemer-Shah, seems to be rightly exposed in and by the niche, the most proper place to the hierophany according to both Islamic and pre-Islamic beliefs.

A curious confirmation of the niche symbology might likewise be offered   also by another place dedicated to the hierophany of the heavenly appointed monarch, the throne. In the Persian and Persianate tradition its back has infact mostly a trefoil shape possibly related to the same conceit of Sky-Gate (plate 18) (again see here 'The Niche, the Rug and the Throne').

In conclusion, it is thus plausibly to assume that the two designs of the Cairene Ottoman and Safavid rug do have a similar symbology, yet express quite different cultural and religious milieu as the subtleties in their designs would declare.

16- Timurid tile 14th

17-Late Timurid cloud collar

17 - Chinese cloud collar

18 - Gengis Khan, Rashid al Din miniature, 1247-1318

                                             
                                               -----------------------------------------------------





Bibliographic references
Akin, G., The Muezzin Mahfili and Pool in the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne, Muqarnas, Vol. 12 page 63, edited by G. Neciplogu.
Arnak, S. Gifts in Motion, Ottoman-Safavid Cultural Exchange, 1501-1618, University of Minnesota, 2012.
Arjomand S., Religious Extremism(Ghuluww), Sufism and Sunnism in Safavid Iran. 1501-1722,
Journal of Asian History,Vol. 15, No. 1 (1981), pp. 1-35.
Black A., The History of Islamic Political Thought: From the Prophet to the Present, Edinburgh Press, 2011.
Cammann S., The Symbolism of the Cloud Collar Motif Author, The Art Bulletin, Vol. 33, No. 1 , pp. 1-9, The College Art Association (Mar., 1951).
Canby S. R., Shah 'Abbas; the Remaking of Iran, London, 2009.
Dressler, M., Writing Religion: The Making of Turkish Alevis Islam, Oxford University Press, 2013.
Ellis C. G., Oriental Carpets in the Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, 1988.
Franses M., "Some Wool Pile Persian-Design Niche Rugs," Oriental Carpet and Textile Studies, volume V, part 2, Danville, California, 1999, pp. 47 and 99.
Franses M. and Bennett I, “The Topkapi Prayer Rugs,”Hali, Issue 39.
Kuprulu, M. F,. The History of Turkish Literature, 1980, (1920-21).
Mills J., The Salting Group: a History and Clarification, OCTS, 5 II, 1999.
Murray L. Eiland, Jr. and Robert Pinner, eds., Oriental Carpet and Textile Studies, vol. V, part 2: The Salting Carpets,ICOC, 1999, pp. 42-67.
Necipoğlu G., The age of Sinan: architectural culture in the Ottoman Empire,  Princeton University Neciplogu, G., Religious Inscriptions on the Great Mosques, http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic570061.files/articles/Religious_Inscriptions.pdf Press, 2005 (Quranic Inscriptions on Sinan's Mosques: A Comparison with their Safavid and Mughal Counterparts. in Word of God, Art of Man, edFahmida Suleman, London 2007).
Tezcan U. and Rogers J. M., ed., The Topkapi Saray Museum, Boston, 1987.
The Amasya Peace Treaty between the Ottoman Empire and Iran (June 1, 1555) Bullettin of the georgia National Academy of Sciences, vol. 3, no. 1, 2009.
Thompson J., Milestones in the History of Carpets, Milan, 2006, pp. 220-223.
"Auction Price Guide," Hali, Issue 144, p. 115.