Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T03:05:15.353Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The past re-made: the case of oriental carpets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Murray L. Eiland III
Murray L. Eiland III*
Affiliation:
Research Laboratory for Archaeology & History of Art, 6 Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3QJ, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Old carpets, as informative material objects, are therefore the proper stuff of archaeology. Aspects of the carpet world offer food for thought as to how entities we recognize among the debris of antiquity come to be recognized and valued. Here James Mellaaart's recorded paintings from Çatal Hüyük, which ‘surfaced’ a generation after the dig was completed, have now come to have an unexpected role.

Type
Notes
Information
Antiquity , Volume 67 , Issue 257 , December 1993 , pp. 859 - 863
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beattie, M. 1972. The Thyssen-Bornemisza collection of oriental rugs. Castagnola.Google Scholar
Briggs, A. 1940. Timurid carpets, Ars Islámica 7: 20–54, 146–63.Google Scholar
Collon, D. 1990. Subjective reconstruction? The Çatal Hüyük wall paintings, HALI (October): 119–23.Google Scholar
David, M. 1980. The new Turkoman mythology, in Saunders, P. (ed.), Tribal visions: 17–24. Novato.Google Scholar
Eiland, ML. JR . 1978. Chinese and exotic rugs. Boston (MA): New York Graphic Society.Google Scholar
Eiland, ML. 1982. The origins of Turkoman guls, Oriental Rug Review (July): 1–3.Google Scholar
Eiland, ML. 1990. Book review: The goddess from Anatolia, Oriental Rug Review (Aug./Sept.): 19–26.Google Scholar
Eiland, ML. 1990. Turkoman rugs: myths and scholarship, in Eiland, M. Jr (ed.), Oriental rugs from Pacific collections: 116–29. San Francisco (CA): San Francisco Bay Area Rug Society.Google Scholar
Eiland, ML. 1991. The Moghul strapwork carpets, Oriental Rug Review (Aug./Sept): 28–37.Google Scholar
Ellis, C.G. 1988. Oriental carpets in the Philadelphia Museum of Art. Philadelphia (PA): Philadelphia Museum of Art.Google Scholar
Frauenknecht, B. 1984. Early Turkish tapestries. Nurnberg.Google Scholar
Gimbutas, M. 1990. Wall paintings of Çatal Hüyük, 8th-7th millennia BC, Review of Archaeology (Fall): 1–5.Google Scholar
Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. 1992. Constructing the past, Review of Archaeology (Spring): 37–9.Google Scholar
Mallett, M. 1993a. The goddess from Anatolia: an updated view of the Catal Hiiyuk controversy, Oriental Rug Review (Dec./Jan.): 24–31.Google Scholar
Mallett, M. 1993b. A weaver‘s view of the Çatal Hüyük controversy, Oriental Rug Review (Dec./Jan.): 32–43.Google Scholar
Martin, F.R. 1908. A history of oriental carpets before 1800. Vienna.Google Scholar
Mellaart, J. 1963. Excavations at Çatal Hüyük, 1962, second preliminary report, Anatolian Studies 13: 43–103.Google Scholar
Mellaart, J. 1967. Çatal Hüyük, a Neolithic town. New York (NY): McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Mellaart, J. Hirsch, U. & Balpinar, B. 1989. The goddess from Anatolia. Milan: Eskenazi.Google Scholar
Petsopoulis, Y. 1991. Kilims: masterpieces from Turkey. New York (NY): Rizzoli.Google Scholar
Pope, A.U. 1937/8. A survey of Persian art. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, J. 1980. Turkmen: tribal carpets and traditions. Washington (DC): Textile Museum.Google Scholar
Voight, M. 1991. The goddess from Anatolia: an archaeological perspective, Oriental Rug Review (Dec/Jan.): 32–9.Google Scholar