Just today the rug above appeared on the internet in a "dealer's" advertisement with this curious caption: "Old Tekke funerary rug".
Now, what pray tell gave michael craycraft, the would be seller, the idea this rug was used in a funeral; was made to be used in a funeral (and then ended up on the floor where it was trampled almost to death); or even in the 1 chance out of a million it was actually associated with a "funeral"?
RK can see none, nor have we ever heard such a use for this rather common type of later Tekke weaving.
OK, the seller states there are four colors of silk. So what, this doesn't help to confirm his stupid idea.
This is not the first time Mr craycraft has posited inane, might RK say asinine, ideas about Turkmen rugs.
He appears to be full of them, but we'd suggest he keep them to himself or at least only share them with those foolish enough to listen.
Doing it publicly only increases his reputation as a turko-dummy, crackpot and moron.
Let's all remember one of his most notable idiocies: being the first to discover a pre-S group weaving, which was nothing but equally as lame-brained.
Clearly this will not be the last time RK will be moved to ask mr craycraft where, or is it how, he makes this nonsense up?