For two years or so, jorg rageth has been peddling his talk “From Sagdak to Salor: Design Traditions of Central Asia” in front of rugDUMB audiences.
RK has never had the opportunity to hear it but we have read and heard comments and quite frankly are surprised others have not taken to comment publicly.
Until we have the opportunity to hear it, or read it, we will hold ours; however, we will say the following about something rageth is quoted as saying.
"He(rageth) noted that people should think of Turkmen design as a basket that wandered around, collecting designs over time”
Yessshhhh, not only is this incredibly turko-ignorant it is supremely turko-impertinent, as it reduces the culturally important sacred symbols found in Turkmen iconography to nothing but a casual collection of objet trouvé.
But what else to expect from a basically uneducated turko-clown who, by his own admission, only learned of Sogdian civilization from a reference in Moshkova, which “…prompted him to find out more about them from other sources.”
There is absolutely no indication the Salor, or any other Turkmen group, copied Sogdian designs directly, or even indirectly. Nor is there any indication, however slight, that Sogdians became part of, or were somehow amalgamated with, the Salor; again as rageth maintains.
What is more probable, and the thesis of RK Weaving Art Museum exhibition ANIMALS PEARLS and FLOWERS: Synthesis of Turkmen Iconography, is a common shared original source.
Where did this source originate?
If pushed to guess, we would have to say north and somewhat east in Sythian territory...
But one thing is sure, rageth's dumbass belief the Turkmen wandered around,
accidently or on purpose,"collecting designs" is foolish and ridiculous.
Frankly, RK is amazed rageth can find his way out of bed and tie his shoe-laces each morning without help!
The fact RugDUMB permits and encourages someone like rageth to travel around giving “lectures” demonstrates why RK calls it RugDUMB.
And we look forward to someday soon reading rageth’s “research” in the forever forthcoming book he is supposedly publishing on Turkmen rugs.
If it is anything like his former work, on Anatolian Kelim, we will have no trouble demonstrating why our opinion of his work is as low as this and other commentaries we have published explain.