RK was right. Not only has dodds been trying to peddle this "prayer" rug since at least 1996, when he "placed" it in the Atlantic Collections exhibition and publication but it was also 'exhibited' in "Masterpieces from Philadelphia Collections" held at the Ross Gallery of the University of Pennsylvania, as the two citations below clearly demonstrate.
Dodds, D. R. and M. L. Eiland, Jr., et. al., ORIENTAL RUGS FROM ATLANTIC COLLECTIONS, Philadelphia ICOC, 1996, p. 176, pl. 198.
EXHIBITED:"Central Asian Rugs from Private Collections," Philadelphia ICOC, 1996.
"Antique Rugs of the Turkmen Tribes: Masterpieces from Philadelphia Collections," Arthur Ross Gallery, University of Pennsylvania, 2003.
Both these 'exhibitions' were organized by, and curated by, dennis the cheat and thief dodds who thought nothing of using them for his own commercial and highly unethical purposes.
Like his bogus 'bellini', which dodds proverbially traipsed from Maine to Spain in his leave no stone unturned effort to sell it, this "prayer" rug has received a similar treatment from mr rug salesman dodds.
Just for further laughs here is the late but surely not so great robert pinner's comments about dodds's "prayer" rug published in the Atlantic Collections publication:
"...the scarcity of Turkmen prayer rugs woven before the late 19th century.. . (is because that) prayer rugs were not part of the early Turkmen weaving tradition." However, this very rare rug displays a distinctive, yet subtly articulated, architectural form of a mihrab at the top of the field, unequivocally identifying this enigmatic weaving as a prayer rug. Woven in a region east of the Caspian Sea, this rug conveys all the design features of a dramatic and unique art weaving. We know of no other example of this type in the literature. The winged eagle (Pinner) ornaments are startling and the palette is very diverse with three shades of indigo, including green, and three shades of madder, including apricot. The prolific use of true camel hair in the details is unusual in Yomut family weavings. Note the variations in main border elements as the weaver changes from archaic curled-leaf motifs to ashik forms to stepped polygon "Memling" type medallions. It is a stunning collector piece. Very special."
Come on now, mr pin-head, if dodds's rug is so "very special" how come after 15 plus years of being on the market and marketed everywhere by dennis dodds it is still unsold and remains in his inventory?
RK is not ashamed to call pinner a novice and turko-know-little -- we did it to his face while he was alive and we will continue to say so now that pinner is no longer with us.
A turko-creep like a pinner or a dodds -- shall we include others like hoffscheister, sienknecht, munkasci, et.al. -- apparently can't discern a genuinely historic Turkmen rug from a piece of airport-art; nor can, or do, they notice when someone can't.
So, will lightning strike twice?
Will another naive, trusting curator/purchaser like the one from the Los Angeles County Art Museum dodds blatantly lied to and cheated show up to buy his "prayer" rug?
RK believes dodds really has nerve, or is it just naked thievery, to continue to hype crapola rugs, each time upping the ante on making even more outrageous claims, like these airport-art revivals? Or is he just so dishonest as to believe he has the right to then place them in "museum" exhibitions and try to sell them?
Time is now and long past to take dodds out and get rid of him, his shit stinks and while rugDUMB is nothing but a cesspool, who need more crapola especially dodds's clogging the pipes?
PS: Notice how the dating, which was "1800-1850" in 1996 according to the caption in the Atlantic Collections publication, now morphed to "circa 1800" according to dodds?
Oh, RK knows: dodds must have done some real "research", or it is a "new" c14 date -- yeah right, don't make RK laugh any harder, dodds you turko-schmuck.
And speaking of changes, below, is the "condition report" for the Yomud "prayer" rug published in Atlantic Collections:
"Comments On Condition: The short pile shows localized wear but is in good condition overall for its significant age, with few minor reweaves."
Guess somehow the "few" reweaves noticed back then, in 1996, have now in 2010 been miraculously turned into only "1 square inch (6 sq cm) of reknotting", according to liar and cheat dodds.
Or did he just forget about them as well?