«Արևելյան գորգը» - Ֆոլքմար Գանցհորնի հետազոտության հատվածներ

The article, presented by Karen Ageqyan based on fragments of Volkmar Gantzhorn's study "The Oriental Carpet," is devoted to a reconsideration of the concept, established in scholarship, of the origin of oriental carpet-weaving and to substantiating the Armenian Christian roots of this art.

Introduction and Methodology

The material includes a foreword by Dr. Robert Bartlett Haas, the author's own word from Gantzhorn, and the beginning of his scholarly introduction to the book, defended as a dissertation at the University of Tübingen (1987). The author notes that, following the works of F.R. Martin (1908) and Kurt Erdmann (1955), his study represents a third attempt to create a comprehensive history of the oriental carpet, based on decades of field research and the study of museum and private collections in Europe, Asia, and the USA.

Key Thesis

The article's main thesis is a rejection of the hypothesis of a nomadic, Turkic, or Central Asian origin of the carpet in favor of the argument that it was born on the Armenian Highland in the era of early Christianity, long before the appearance of Islam in the region. Carpets are interpreted not as utilitarian objects but as cult objects — "icons" created within the Eastern Christian tradition.

Critique of Previous Historiography

A significant portion of the text is devoted to examining the methodological errors of Kurt Erdmann:

the uncritical use of the myth of the "Seljuk carpet" and the hypothesis of nomadic origin;
distortions in the translations of Marco Polo, Abu al-Fida, and Ibn Battuta in favor of the Turkic version;
the neglect of key Arabic sources collected in the ARS ISLAMICA publication (1942–1951);
imprecise translation of the terms "carpet," "mahfur," "Armani mahfur," "musalla," which obscures the connection of carpets to the Armenian tradition.

The author also shows how the market conditions of the 19th century (the shift from the "Turkish" carpet to the "Persian" one) and the political catastrophes of the early 20th century (the Armenian Genocide, the deportation of Greeks) distorted both terminology and subsequent scholarly interpretations.

Conclusion

The article's key conclusion is that the ornamental and compositional heritage of the oriental carpet constitutes an organic part of Armenian Christian culture and identity, subsequently appropriated by other peoples either through ignorance of the facts or through deliberate manipulation of them. The publication of fragments of Gantzhorn's work on ashkhar.org is intended to introduce into Russian-language scholarly circulation a well-argued alternative to the traditional, Turkocentric history of carpet-weaving.