|  |  
                
               A 
              Moscow Kilim of 1891 March 2005
 The carpet half (Rosalind 
              Benedict, Anita De Carlo, Richard Wright) of the textiles and carpets 
              vetting committee at the fall, 2004, International Art and Antiques 
              Show in New York found another interesting carpet, in this case, 
              a pileless rug (Figure 1) offered by Moheban and Co. as Bessarabian 
              -- which it definitely wasn’t -- but not a bad try for a label. Inscriptions, 
              however, make the place of origin immediately evident, an orphanage 
              in Moscow. It is the case that deciphering Russian abbreviations 
              can only be done by an experienced person. Wendy Salmond, Co-chair, 
              Department of Art, Chapman University had no trouble at all recognizing 
              that the letters in the printed Cyrillic (Figure 2) identified the 
              orphanage’s patron, Grand Duchess Ksenia Aleksandrovna. Professor 
              Salmond has broadened her interests considerably over the years, 
              but continues as the authority on European Russia’s kustar’ 
              program. (Arts and Crafts in Late Imperial Russia: Reviving the 
              Kustar Art Industries, 1870 – 1917, Cambridge University Press, 
              1996)  
             
               
                |  |   
                | Figure 
                    2 The Grand Duchess Inscription |  The other writing, that 
              in cursive Roman, (Figure 3) presents difficulties. “Moscow” 
              is in French and clear enough, but what appears to be an individual’s 
              name (possibly but not verifiably Finnish) is only partially legible. 
              At the time French was the language of the Russian upper crust; 
              thus either a local resident or someone overseas is a possible referent.  
             
               
                |  |   
                | Figure 
                    3 Possible Donor Inscription |  This individual’s 
              relationship to the rug is a matter of guesswork, but sponsor may 
              be a reasonable notion, possibly for an exhibition with subsequent 
              donation to some organization, or for retention by the orphanage. 
              (It is not likely that a rug with writing on it would have been 
              made for ordinary trade purposes.) In brief, the Grand Duchess was 
              patron of the orphanage; some individual was patron of the rug. 
               Carpets and textiles 
              with western Asia patterns and motifs (Figure 4) occasionally were 
              made in Moscow as training exercises for instructors (Figure 5) 
              going to the provinces to work with kustar’ support 
              organizations, carpet-making being a significant home craft activity 
              in several parts of the empire. Russian awareness if such designs 
              stemmed at least from the 1872 publication by V. V. Stasov if what 
              he termed “Russian peoples ornamentation.” . 
               
                |  |  |   
                | Figure 
                    4 Instructress Product, c. 1910 | Figure 
                    5 Instructress Training Studio, c. 1910 |  As for 
              the New York kilim (12’ 6” x 11’ with relatively 
              fine yarns) it is probably best viewed as a pastiche of a center 
              medallion Persian rug. Although both main border (Figure 6) and 
              angular field drawing (Figure 7) resemble a standard Heriz, each 
              is only generally allusive. Guard borders and individual motifs 
              also show western Asia affinities but are not quite the real thing. 
               
               
                |  |  |   
                | Figure 
                    6 Border Detail | Figure 
                    7 Field Detail |  The best bet is that 
              the carpet was made at the orphanage but not necessarily for it. 
              Child labor was not shunned and, indeed, tended to be viewed as 
              uplifting in the case of orphans. At bottom, however, why the rug 
              was made can only be speculated about. One thing is certain: years 
              later it provided an interesting day in New York. 
    |  |