Finding earlier and far better analogs for the two 'Shano' rugs michael black, ex-Baluch rug collector and aspiring dealer of Anatolian village rugs, bought from james burns is not difficult.
These rugs are late polyglots, their iconography a smrgsbord of well known design elements, amulets and icon found throughout the western pan-Asian weaving region, specifically eastern Anatolia, aka Kurdistan, and the western Caucasus, aka Armenia.
There is nothing special or even interesting in the way the weavers of the two burn's 'Shanbo' rug threw them together in what can only be described as a haphazard careless manner.
In fact both of them, as we demonstrated, compare so poorly to their earlier prototypes it is truly impossible for burns, black or anyone else to prove different. These two rugs are gross, ungainly, ugly and wothless for anything other than letting fido have a afternoon snooze.
Comparing the ghastly green field 'Shanbo' to another rug that can be seen as a strong prototype is interesting, and we suggest mr burns and black take a few minutes of their otherwise busy day and see how poorly the 'Shanbo' looks when placed next to a far superior related weaving.
Left: Eastern Anatolian, probably Sivas region; Kirchheim Collection; published Orient Stars, dated therein 17th century but RK would move that up a century and call it mid-18th century; plate 160; Right: black's, ex-james burns, ghastly and gross so-called 'Shanbo' rug
By the way, while the burns/black 'Shanbo is definitely later, RK would date it first half 19th century, but its late date is not the problem. Rather, it is the lack of viable connection the weaver had to the historic weaving culture. This could be likened to only being able to see and sense it through a cloud and fog of cultural disconnect. The flaccid, sloppy, disjointed and unconnected design is the direct result, one that in our opinion dooms a rug like this, as well as the other burns 'Shanbo', to the garbage pail of oriental rug collecting history.