Property from the Estate of E. L. King, Jr., Sotheby's, New York, June 3, 1989, lot 7

Pile generally good, approximately 1/6 in. with areas of oxidized dark browns. A 4in. by 4in. reweave in lower end. Some scattered repiling. Some minor spot foundations showing mostly in oxidized areas. Lower end with a 1in. by 1in. repaired/rewoven hole. A similar 1/2in. by 1/2in. restoration along seam edge. Sides and ends bound. Very supple handle; lustrous wool; good condition.
In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective qualified opinion.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING CONDITION OF A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD "AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED IN THE CATALOGUE.

The drawing, colors and structure of the fragment offered here relate it to an early group of Chinese carpets, for example, Eberhart Herrmann, Seltene Orientteppiche, Vol. 3, Munich, nr. 120, A Chinese carpet fragment, eighteenth century; Edelmann Galleries, Sale Catalogue, October 29, 1982, lot 6, a Chinese throne carpet and an Audience carpet; Eberhart Herrmann, Seltene Orientteppiche, Vol. IX, Munich, 1987, pp. 11-16, an Imperial Ming Chinese carpet, sixteenth century; and M. S. Dimand and Jean Mailey, Oriental Rugs in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1973, fig. 296, an Imperial Chinese Dragon carpet, eighteenth century. Dimand and Mailey, op. cit., p. 321, note that Chinese carpets reflected the decorative style of the periods in which they were woven and that the five-clawed dragon was officially the symbol for the Emperor during the Ming and Qing dynasties. Large carpets woven for the court would often include such a dragon and therefore the offered lot and the carpets cited above were most likely of Imperial Workshop production. The present lot and the Herrmann fragment., Hermann, Vol. III, op. cit., share similar small, plump precipitating clouds and elongated “flames” issuing from the swirling scaled dragon, with the drawing of these elements in the present lot being more assertive and elegantly articulated. The Herrmann carpet, Herrmann, Vol. III, op. cit., and the Metropolitan Museum’s example, op. cit., suggest a complete design scheme for the carpet from which the offered lot is a fragment. The claws of the dragons in these carpets and the lone claw appearing in the upper right corner of the present fragment, share the same distinct knuckle with a craggy, sharply pointed claw. The colors of saffron, ivory, black, deep and pale blue with a grey-green found in all of the cited examples and the offered lot place them all in the earlier group of Chinese weaving. Herrmann IX, op. cit., dates his carpet to the sixteenth century and from the similarity in drawing, color, and structure, the offered lot and other carpets here cited must belong to this earlier group of Chinese carpet production.