After taking a gander at the latest ‘saloon’ posted to professor steve price’s turk0tek.com website RK noticed a soumak khorjin described as having ‘inlaid’ soumak stitching.
This reminded us of a similar technique used in one of the soumak khorjin in our collection, so against our better judgment we decided to email a photo and some comments to him.
We did this under the assumed name of Rogwyn van Myles since price will not allow RK participation on account of our habit of proving what a genuine know-nothing, autocratic pedant price=clown, as we have so named him, truly is.
This time proved no different and professor price=clown eventually figured out it was RK and shut down the ‘discussion’ but not before RK again showed him to be as described.
We encourage readers who have not seen it to do so if only to appreciate the difference between price’s totally ignorant and stupid approach to the subject and our pragmatic and measured one.
Not to waste time and to get directly to the point the following comparison of two soumak khorjin says it all.
Left: Baktiari soumak khorjin listed for sale on rugrabbit.com; Right: Afshar khorjin, RK collection
This morning we spied the Baktiari soumak online and could not help but notice the strong resemblance to ours.
The strongest similarity is the repetition of the same unusual, and we believe unique inner border of ours, now used as the major border in the considerably later Baktiari.
Also the colorful outer chevron border has become a pair of simplified, bichromatic minor borders.
And the multi-colored crosses, which fill the field, have likewise become the simplified singular field motif.
There should be little doubt these two khorjin are quite closely related.
What is interesting to note is the owner’s dating the Baktiari to late 19th / early 20th century, a date that is eminently believable.
In our www.turk0tek.com exchanges with professor price=clown regardless of the evidence we presented he remained emphatic RK’s dating our khorjin pre-1850 was entirely incorrect, and his belief it was late 19th / early 20th far more accurate.
Professor price=clown did not get that name for nothing, and as the comparison above demonstrates there is no way RK’s khorjin is the age he so ridiculously claims.
Dating by comparison is really the only avenue open for non-classical weavings and of course then extrapolating to calendar dates is only an exercise.
But as the comparsion of these two khorjin shows dating the one on the left circa 1880-1900 more than convincingly proves the one on the right to be at least 30 – 50 years earlier.
We sincerely doubt the one on the left is later than that, which it would have to be to support professor price=clown’s dumbass dating.
RK finds it amazing steve price has the gall to ever open his mouth about anything that is rug related and to do it in opposition to RK can only be interpreted as both stupid and insipid.