- Home
- Textiles, Carpets and Tapestries
- Carpets
- The Kush Motif in Turkmen Ensis
TurkoTek
TurkoTek is a noncommercial site devoted to collectible weavings, where rug enthusiasts can connect.
www.turkotek.com
by Louis Dubreuil
The Place of Ensis in Turkmen Rugs
The kush or kuç motif is one of the original designs used exclusively on Turkmen ensis, which are now generally understood to be door rugs for the Turkmen yurt or oï (the hypothesis that ensi were prayer rugs is no longer generally accepted). The questions of whether ensi were used inside or outside, every day or just for special circumstances, remain open. Some old reports, such as the one cited by MacDonald (TRIBAL RUGS, p. 66) about the Saryks in the Pendjeh oasis, indicate that ensis were outdoor hangings for the kibitkas (Saryk’s yurt).
In central Asian tribal societies, the yurt was the center of family life, the primordial shelter, and its use was regulated by numerous rules. Those rules were based on a strong symbolic system linked with their vision of the cosmos. Failure to follow those rules can have negative feedback on the life of the family and community.
The rules are from pre-Islamic times and were retained after Islam came into those countries. Pre-Islamic beliefs were animist and shamanistic, using many superstitions and prophylactic practices and objects to oppose the “evil eye” and other negative spirits. So, the yurt was protected with numerous devices that were also elements of decoration. As the main production of nomadic peoples in central Asia was sheep, wool is the basis of the yurt covering (felt) and of the different artifacts made by women: utilitary weavings (covers, bags, cradles, bands for the yurt) and prestige weavings (the bridal trousseau, pieces for the bride’s palanquin, trappings for the horses, etc.).

The designs of those artifacts are adapted to their uses, either because the weavings require a special technique (warp faced weavings for the bands that are subjects to longitudinal stress, for example) that is compatible with only certain design elements or because the use requires a particular symbolic vocabulary drawn for prophylactic purposes.
Weaving has two other purposes in nomadic tribal community: it attests to the skill of the women, and the weavings are group markers. The latter may explain the conservatism in the motifs. The natural drift within a tribal group through the transmission from mother to daughter that causes design evolution is very slow in Turkmen groups; there are no major design differences between what are believed to be 17th and 19th century chuvals. When a group is defeated, its specific design disappears even if there are many people left (Salor, for example). This situation has rapidly changed since the middle of the 19th century due to the opening of the occidental market (the introduction of a railway into the Merv area, for example). Skill as a weaver can be also a criterion influencing choice of a wife, although it is likely that marriages were arranged at the clan or family level. And the pressure would have been heavy on the girl's shoulders for being a weaver of whom the clan or family would be proud. This pressure surely increased when weaving rugs became a significant source of income at the time of market evolution.
Weaving dowry pieces was certainly the top of the weaver’s life. In traditional societies, the wedding is the most important point of the family life; it is the insurance of the family continuity, the hope of new opulence, the opportunity of new alliances, the venue for displaying the wealth of the family or clan. But the wedding has also an element of danger: birth could easily turn to death: of the baby or of the mother. Death of the mother has a dramatic impact on the family continuity. This is why dowry pieces were heavily charged with prophylactic power that struggled against the evils that might ruin the family. This is not peculiar to Turkmen; similar processes are common in many societies. But the Turkmen developed trousseau weaving to the level of art.
Moshkova held that Turkmen products traditionally have guls that are group markers (with exceptions; for example, the tauk nuska gul is trans-tribal), and that there are guls for chuvals and guls for main carpets. These theses should be examined under the light of more recent rug studies.
Unlike bags and carpets, ensi never use guls, even when they aren't in the standard hatchli layout. Ensis generally follow a scheme that can be encountered with variations among all the Turkmen groups, although some are not in this standard layout; for example some Yomut ensis or “ikat design” Ersari ensi with overall field design. The standard ensi layout is oriented with a top and a lower part. This is principally due to the door function and the supposed vertical display. The layout is symmetrical with a vertical axis. This axis is generally a kind of pole with an horizontal bar and this cross (hatchli) divides the central field into four parts. In the great majority of ensis, those four panels are decorated with repeated motifs named kush (bird) or insi kush (face to face birds). Yomut ensis do not generally include kush motifs, although some do.
General layout of ensis (after Pinner):

There are many questions about the ensi layout and its symbolic interpretations. Some symbols seems to be confirmed by traditional appellations: the lower part with one or two elems is associated with the ground or the earth; the upper part is associated with the sky or the heavens. The ensi could be interpreted as a cosmologic chart, which would also explain why this design is oriented. Some authors have seen evocation of the four cardinal points in the four central part. Others simply see this panel design as the copy of a paneled wood door. In the two lateral main borders, depending of the type, one can also see representations of climbing vines that symbolize ascension from the ground to the sky (in the case of meander design), or an ascending tree form (ashik or tree-ashik), or multi-branched candelabra (gopuz). The design of this latter form could be read as a totemic pole or tree with bird figures on the branches. This is an ambiguous form.
The central pole can be read as a tree of life. All those symbols gathered in a rug make a very coherent picture. If the entrance of a yurt must be heavily charged with symbols and absolutely must not leave the passage to negative strengths and demons, it is not surprising that a special rug is there to protect the yurt and its inhabitants.
The Place of Ensis in Turkmen Rugs
The kush or kuç motif is one of the original designs used exclusively on Turkmen ensis, which are now generally understood to be door rugs for the Turkmen yurt or oï (the hypothesis that ensi were prayer rugs is no longer generally accepted). The questions of whether ensi were used inside or outside, every day or just for special circumstances, remain open. Some old reports, such as the one cited by MacDonald (TRIBAL RUGS, p. 66) about the Saryks in the Pendjeh oasis, indicate that ensis were outdoor hangings for the kibitkas (Saryk’s yurt).
In central Asian tribal societies, the yurt was the center of family life, the primordial shelter, and its use was regulated by numerous rules. Those rules were based on a strong symbolic system linked with their vision of the cosmos. Failure to follow those rules can have negative feedback on the life of the family and community.
The rules are from pre-Islamic times and were retained after Islam came into those countries. Pre-Islamic beliefs were animist and shamanistic, using many superstitions and prophylactic practices and objects to oppose the “evil eye” and other negative spirits. So, the yurt was protected with numerous devices that were also elements of decoration. As the main production of nomadic peoples in central Asia was sheep, wool is the basis of the yurt covering (felt) and of the different artifacts made by women: utilitary weavings (covers, bags, cradles, bands for the yurt) and prestige weavings (the bridal trousseau, pieces for the bride’s palanquin, trappings for the horses, etc.).

The designs of those artifacts are adapted to their uses, either because the weavings require a special technique (warp faced weavings for the bands that are subjects to longitudinal stress, for example) that is compatible with only certain design elements or because the use requires a particular symbolic vocabulary drawn for prophylactic purposes.
Weaving has two other purposes in nomadic tribal community: it attests to the skill of the women, and the weavings are group markers. The latter may explain the conservatism in the motifs. The natural drift within a tribal group through the transmission from mother to daughter that causes design evolution is very slow in Turkmen groups; there are no major design differences between what are believed to be 17th and 19th century chuvals. When a group is defeated, its specific design disappears even if there are many people left (Salor, for example). This situation has rapidly changed since the middle of the 19th century due to the opening of the occidental market (the introduction of a railway into the Merv area, for example). Skill as a weaver can be also a criterion influencing choice of a wife, although it is likely that marriages were arranged at the clan or family level. And the pressure would have been heavy on the girl's shoulders for being a weaver of whom the clan or family would be proud. This pressure surely increased when weaving rugs became a significant source of income at the time of market evolution.
Weaving dowry pieces was certainly the top of the weaver’s life. In traditional societies, the wedding is the most important point of the family life; it is the insurance of the family continuity, the hope of new opulence, the opportunity of new alliances, the venue for displaying the wealth of the family or clan. But the wedding has also an element of danger: birth could easily turn to death: of the baby or of the mother. Death of the mother has a dramatic impact on the family continuity. This is why dowry pieces were heavily charged with prophylactic power that struggled against the evils that might ruin the family. This is not peculiar to Turkmen; similar processes are common in many societies. But the Turkmen developed trousseau weaving to the level of art.
Moshkova held that Turkmen products traditionally have guls that are group markers (with exceptions; for example, the tauk nuska gul is trans-tribal), and that there are guls for chuvals and guls for main carpets. These theses should be examined under the light of more recent rug studies.
Unlike bags and carpets, ensi never use guls, even when they aren't in the standard hatchli layout. Ensis generally follow a scheme that can be encountered with variations among all the Turkmen groups, although some are not in this standard layout; for example some Yomut ensis or “ikat design” Ersari ensi with overall field design. The standard ensi layout is oriented with a top and a lower part. This is principally due to the door function and the supposed vertical display. The layout is symmetrical with a vertical axis. This axis is generally a kind of pole with an horizontal bar and this cross (hatchli) divides the central field into four parts. In the great majority of ensis, those four panels are decorated with repeated motifs named kush (bird) or insi kush (face to face birds). Yomut ensis do not generally include kush motifs, although some do.
General layout of ensis (after Pinner):

A : BASE PANEL, ELEM, B : SECOND PANEL, C : SECOND PANEL BORDER, D: OUTER BORDER, E : MAIN OR CENTER BORDER, F : FIELD AND CENTRAL PANEL BORDER, G : CENTER PANEL, H : VERTICAL POLE, I : POLE ONAMENT, J, K, L : UPPER PANEL, M: GUARD STRIPES, N : FIELD, O : KUSH MOTIF
There are many questions about the ensi layout and its symbolic interpretations. Some symbols seems to be confirmed by traditional appellations: the lower part with one or two elems is associated with the ground or the earth; the upper part is associated with the sky or the heavens. The ensi could be interpreted as a cosmologic chart, which would also explain why this design is oriented. Some authors have seen evocation of the four cardinal points in the four central part. Others simply see this panel design as the copy of a paneled wood door. In the two lateral main borders, depending of the type, one can also see representations of climbing vines that symbolize ascension from the ground to the sky (in the case of meander design), or an ascending tree form (ashik or tree-ashik), or multi-branched candelabra (gopuz). The design of this latter form could be read as a totemic pole or tree with bird figures on the branches. This is an ambiguous form.
The central pole can be read as a tree of life. All those symbols gathered in a rug make a very coherent picture. If the entrance of a yurt must be heavily charged with symbols and absolutely must not leave the passage to negative strengths and demons, it is not surprising that a special rug is there to protect the yurt and its inhabitants.


