Fritz Kreisler Unvergänglich - Unvergessen

Aufnahme-Datum: 15./16. Dezember 1926 in Berlin

Der Belcantist der Geige  Fritz Kreisler
Von der Jahrhundertwende bis etwa in die vierziger Jahre war der Name Fritz Kreislers schier identisch mit der Idealvorstellung von geigerischer Kunst: trotz Adolf Buschs, des noblen Stilisten, trotz Bronislav Hubermanns, des brillanten Technikers, trotz Heifetz, des feurigzupackenden Virtuosen, galt Kreisler als der Geiger seiner Zeit, war er populär wie ein Tenor, der sich nicht scheu, seine Kunst auch an die Salon-Piece zu "verschwenden" (was Kreisler, auf seine Weise, mit unnachahmlichem Charme machte, man denke nur an "Liebesleid").
Kreisler wurde am 2. Februar 1875 in Wien als Sohn eines aus Krakau stammenden Arztes geboren. Die Familie galt als hochmusikalisch, und der Bruder von Fritz, Hugo, ist wohl nur deshalb als Cellist nicht bekannt geworden, weil Fritz als Geiger imperialen Ruhm erlangte. Als Siebenjähriger kam Kreisler, mit Sondergenehmigung und studierte bei Hellmesberger; sein Kompositionslehrer war Anton Bruckner. Auch als Pianist brachte er es soweit, dass seine Biographen gern die Anekdote aus dem Munde Paderewskis erzählen, der geäussert haben soll, wie froh er sei, dass Kreisler sich für die Violine und nicht für das Klavier entschieden habe. Als Zehnjähriger kam Kreisler nach Paris an das Conservatoire, wo er in der Klasse von J. L. Massart studierte für nur zwei Jahre; dann war er so perfekt, dass seine Lehrer ihm nichts mehr beibringen konnten.   
1888 brachte ihm eine Konzerttournee durch die Vereinigten Staaten, die er mit dem phänomenalen Pianisten Moritz Rosenthal, einem der besten Schüler Liszts, unternahm, die ersten Erfolge, doch danach wurde es einige Jahre recht still um ihn. Er ging nach Wien, machte sein Abitur, absolvierte die Militärzeit und begann mit dem Medizinstudium. Als er sich bei den Wiener Philharmonikern um die Stelle eines zweiten Geigers bewarb, fiel er durch. Die Gründe für dieses "Versagen" sind nicht recht eindeutig: Carl Flesch, selbst ein ganz grosser Geiger und einer der bedeutendsten Pädagogen und Theoretiker des Geigenspiels, vermutete, dass man das genialische Talent einfach verkannt habe; Joachim Hartnack indes äusserte in seinem hoch-instruktiven Buch "Grosse Geiger unserer Zeit" die Ansicht, dass Kreisler zu jener Zeit seine Technik nicht befriedigend unter Kontrolle gehabt habe und dass, möglicherweise, die schon früh bei ihm ausgeprägte sinnliche Expressivität des Spiels bei den auf reinen Stil bedachten Prüfern unangenehm aufgefallen sein.
Das "Versagen" bei der Prüfung aber zeitigte kritische Selbstkontrolle: Kreisler begann aufs neue zu studieren versah seine Technik mit dem unabdingbaren Schliff und disziplinierte, was in seinem Spiel, in seinem über die Massen effektvollen Ton immer durchklingt: eine geradezu rauschhafte Sinnlichkeit. 1899 spielte Kreisler in Berlin unter Nikisch das e-Moll-Konzert von Mendelssohn. Das Konzert war eine Wachablösung: denn Joseph Joachim, der bislang in Berlin geherrscht hatte, wurde durch Kreisler buchstäblich entthront. Joachim Hartnack: "Mit seinem kraftvollen und sinnlich-betörenden Ton überwand Kreisler seine Vorgänger in der Gunst des Publikums. Angesichts der Kreislerschen Tonfülle erschienen die bis dahin so geschätzte glatte Eleganz Sarasates dünnblütig und Joachims vibratolose introvertierte Lyrik akademisch trocken."
Das deutet unausgesprochen auf eine, vermutlich von Kreisler innovierte, technisch-interpretatorische Neuheit: auf das von Kreisler viel stärker als je von Kollegen zuvor als Ausdruckmittel gebrauchte Vibrato.
Das fast ständig angewandte Vibrato verlieh Kreislers ohnehin schon bestrickendem Ton eine ungeheure Wirkung. Man mag bedenklich finden, dass man das zu einer fast kulinarischen Qualität umfunktionierte, und vor allem Pianisten werden spöttisch reagieren, wenn man auf den "Ton an sich" als auf das an Kreisler Faszinierende verweist. Doch bei einem Geiger, da ist der Ton der Mensch selbst, und insofern ist Kreisler einzigartig und unverwechselbar.
Von Beethovens Violinkonzert hat der Geiger zwei Aufnahmen gemacht: die hier vorliegende unter Leo Blech und, fast ein Jahrzehnt später, eine weitere unter Sir John Barbirolli. Die zweite Aufnahme, wenn auch gleich noch von höchstem Rang, zeigt Kreisler nicht mehr auf der Höhe seines ganzen könnens: der vormals so kraftvolle, selbstgewisse, sinnliche Ton klingt verhaltener, gebrochener, ihm fehlt die vitale männliche Kraft. Die frühere Aufnahme zeigt Kreisler im Glanz eines selbstbewusst-sinnlichen Spiels, spontan engagiert, aber durchaus lyrisch; fast ein kleines Wunder ist die Begleitung Leo Blechs, der die damaligen technischen Probleme bei der Aufnahme eines grossen Orchesters mühelos durch eine beispielhaft transparente, deutlich artikulierende und atmend-phrasierende Begleitung überspielt. Über diese Aufnahme, deren dokumentarischer Wert kaum hoch genug zu veranschlagen ist, urteil Hartnach: "…was alle anderen nicht haben, das hatte Kreisler: die schwärmerische Lyrik eines späten Romantikers Wiener Provenienz." Vielleicht ist eines nachzutragen: Kreisler war nicht nur ein glänzender Geiger; er strahlte vor allem einen gewinnenden, persönlichen Charme aus, auch in seinem Spiel; dieser Magnetismus (darf man ihn Persönlichkeit nennen?) hatte sicherlich Teil an dem unermesslichen Erfolg des Künstlers.

Inbegriff des Kapellmeisters – Leo Blech
Der 1871 geborene Leo Blech galt als der Inbegriff kapellmeisterlicher Zuverlässigkeit und Vielseitigkeit. Eine Blech-Aufführung  - das gewährleistete absolut präzise Vorbereitung und sicheren Ablauf, und geflügeltes Wort war, dass man sich, als Sänger oder als Instrumentalist wie in Abrahams Schoss fühlen konnte, wenn Blech am Pult stand. Der Kompositionsschüler von Humperdinck, der noch die Personalunion von Kapell-meister/Komponist wahr machte, kam auf Empfehlung von Richard Strauss im Jahre 1906 an die Lindenoper in Berlin, an der er 1913 musste er vor den Nazis nach Riga und dann nach Stockholm fliehen. 1949 erschien er wieder am Pult der Städtischen Oper in Westberlin hat Leo Blech es auf die kaum glaubliche Zahl von 2600 Aufführungen gebracht, und sicherlich zu seinen grössten Leistungen (neben seinen massstäblichen Carmen-Verdi- und Waner-Interpretationen) gehört, dass er die modernen Komponisten seiner Zeit, die Opern von Strauss, Berlioz, Borodin und Busoni engagiert auf den Spielplan brachte. A.S.

 *******
Fritz Kreisler – Belcantis of the violin
From the turn of the century up to, say, the forties the name Fritz Kreisler was practically identic with an ideal of the art of playing the violin: despite Adolf Busch, the fine stylist, despite Bronislav Hubermann, the brilliant technician, and despite Jascha Heifetz, the fierce light fingered virtuoso, Kreisler was regarded the violin virtuoso at his time. He was as popular as a tenor who does not mind to “lavish” his art to a piece of salon music as well – as Kreisler did with incomparable charm, as e. g. in “Liebesleid”.
Fritz Kreisler was born in Vienna on 2nd February 1875 as son of a medical doctor who had come from Cracow. The family was known to be highly musically gifted, and Fritz´s brother, Hugo, was only not better known as a cellist as he was shadowed by Fritz who became famous all over the world. At seven, Fritz attended the conservatory with a special authorization necessary because of his age. He studied the violin with Hellmesberger and composition with Anton Bruckner. He also showed a fine talent for the piano so that biographers like to quote an anecdote of Paderewski who had said that he was happy that Kreisler had decided for the violin and not the piano. At ten, Fritz Kreisler came to the Paris Conservatoire where he attended the classes of J. L. Massart – only for two years, then he had developed such mastership that there was nothing to study for him.
In 1888 he toured the USA together with the outstanding pianist Moritz Rosenthal, one of Franz Liszt´s best students, and he was extremely successful, Then, however, hardly anything was heard of him for a couple of years. Kreisler returned to Vienna, passed his Abitur, did his national service and bean to study medicine. When he applied at the Viennese Philharmonic for the position of a second violinist he failed. The reasons for his “failure” are not quite clear. Carl Flesch, who was an excellent violinist himself and one of the most important pedagogues and theorists, supposed that the talent of the genius was not recognized; Joachim Hartnack remarked in his book “Grosse Geiger unsure Zeit” (Great Violinists of our Days) that Kreisler, at that time, had not had sufficient control of his technique, and that probably his emotional expressiveness which Kreisler had shown already very early, did not agree with the jury looking for a pure style.
This failure, however, resulted in critical self-control: Kreisler began to study again so that this technique got its final touch. He also learned to control what was so striking in his extraordinarily impressive tone and what was to be recognised at any time: his actually intoxicating sensuousness. In 1899, Kreisler performed Mendelssohn`s Concerto in e-minor in Berlin with Nikisch at the rostrum. This event turned out to be a “changing of the guard: Joseph Joachim, who, to that day, had dominated the Berlin scenes, was dethroned by Kreisler: he used the vibrato as a means of “Kreisler, with his vigorous and sensuous play easily surpassed his predecessors in the public´s esteem. With Kreisler´s sound in mind Sara sate’s smooth elegance which had been so much appreciate before seemed thin and bloodless, and Joachim´s vibratoless and introvert lyrics were at once thought academic and dry”.
Although it is not particularly mentioned this remark gives a hint to a technical novelty in interpretation which, most probably, was initiated by Kreisler: he used the vibrato as a means of expression and would apply it more frequently than his colleagues had ever done. The continuous vibrato made Kreisler´s fascinating tone even more captivating. It might be thought somewhat suspicious that this characteristic was transferred to a nearly culinary quality, and, above all, pianists will mock at the statement that “the very tone” was the most fascinating about Kreisler. But in case of a violinist the tone is the virtuoso himself, and from this point of view Kreisler was unique incomparable.
Kreisler recorded Beethoven´s concerto twice: the first recording was realized under Leo Blech, and nearly ten years later, the second one under Sir John Barbirolli. The second recording, although it is of extreme artistic rank as well, proves that Kreisler had surpassed the peak of his art; his formerly so vigorous, self-conscious, sensuous tone had become more suppressed, it lacked the vital, manly elan. The older recording shows Kreisler´s entire brilliance, his intoxicatingly sensuous art, spontaneous, engaged, but lyrical as well. Leo Blech´s accompaniment is like a miracle, he mastered the technical recording problems of those days by means of absolute transparency, clear articulation and fine phrasing. Hartnack noted on this recording the documentary value of which can hardly be estimated:
“…Kreisler had something all others lacked: the fanciful lyrics of a late romanticist of Viennese origin.” Perhaps there is another fact worth mentioning: Kreisler was not merely an extraordinary violinist; he also exuded a captivating personal charm, and he did so when playing as well. This magnetism (may we call it personality?) certainly contributed a lot to the virtuoso´s overwhelming success.

Leo Blech, Embodiment of a Conductor
Leo Blech, born in 1871, was considered the embodiment of reliability and versatility. Every Blech concert and a faultless performance, and, as it was said, every singer or instrumentalist could feel on Abraham´s bosom whenever Leo Blech was at the rostrum. Blech, who had studied composition with Humperdinck, incorporated the traditional ideal of being conductor and composer alike. By a recommendation of Richard Strauss he was engaged at the Berlin “Linden Oper” in 1906 where he was appointed “Generalmusikdirektor” in 1913. In 1937, under the Nazi regime, he fled to Riga and, later – on, to Stockholm. In 1949 he returned to the rostrum of West Berlin´s opera. At the “Linden Oper” Blech conducted the nearly unbelievable number of 2600 performances, and it is his merit (apart from the mark he set by his production of “Carmen” and the interpretation of Verdi´s and Wagner´s operas) to have included contemporary works, I. e. operas by Strauss, Berlioz, Borodin and Busoni to the repertoire of the “Linden Oper”.
Translation by Anne Frese 
ELECTROLA GESELLSCHAFT M. B. H. KOLN  1926

اوزبک UZBEK

History
It was the treacherous assassination, in 1218 at Otrar, of an embassy despatched by Gengis Khan to Chwarezm Shah Sultan Mohammad that induced Gengis Khan to undertake a campaign of revenge, together with his sons, in Western Asia.
During this expedition, which lasted from 1219 until 1223, they subdued the whole of Central Asia and penetrated as far as Estern Europe. According to Mongol tradition, Gengis divided the conquered regions amongst his sons. Thus the youngest son, Tuli, received the ancestral "Yurt"  in Eastern Mongolia, Ögeday, the regions of Western Mongolia, Chagatay the territory, known today as Chinese Turkestan and Western Turkestan; whereas the oldest son Juchi was allotted the regions most distant from the Mongolian home "Yurt".
This territory consisted of the vast steppes, stretching west from the Selenga to ´as far as the limits reached by the hooves of the Mongol stallions". After the death of Juchi in 1227, his lands were divided amongst his son; Batu was given the western portion, Orda the eastern, and Syban the area between the two.
During the reign of Batu there arose, in the so-called "Qyptschak Steppe", an empire referred to in Islamic sources as the region of the "Golden Horde". From the year 1241 until the middle of the 14th century, this empire had a decisive influence upon Bulgaria and the Moldavian region, its boundearies in the south and east being formed by the Upper Irtysch and the Lower Amu-Darya and Syr-Darya.
The campaigns of the Mongols caused great confusion amongst the tribal lunits of the steppes; ancient ethnic groups were scattered and new political configurations were established.
Through numerous historical sources we are informed that the successful career of a warrior or chieftan was sufficient for his name to be adopted by the unrelated tribal elements, who had served under him, as an indication of their political allegiance.
Thus the name of Uzbek Khan (1312-1340), a descendant of Batu, was adopted by the people that we know today as the Uzbeks.
In the year of the Hen, 720 (1321), Uzbek Khan was converted to Islam by Saich Saijed Ata of Turkestan. Uzbek Khan ruled until 1340 over the territory of the "Golden Horde", and it was he who, according to Abdul Ghazi, "persuaded his subjects to embrace Islam and thereby gave the Turks of the Golden Horde the collective name Uzbek".
The empire of Juchi eventually disolved into various small kingdoms, but it was in the area ruled by the descendans of Syban where the nomadic way of life prevailed and this territory remained in the hands of the descendants of Syban for over two hundred years. These people remained secluded from the influence of urban culture and retained the war-like traditions of the nomads, and were therefore able to assume the dominant position in Central Asia at the time of the decline of the dynasty of Gengis Khan.
Towards the end of the 15th century a successor of Syban, the nephew of Abdul Chair, set out with an army from the Lower Syr-Darya to conquer Transoxiana. This Uzbek army of Shaibani consisted of diverse tribal and ethnic groups; some from the far north, others from Qytai territories (Chinese Turkestan) and from Oxus delta. The Shaibani-Nameh epic lists the many different tribes. These tribal names exist even today amongst the Kirgis, Karakalpak, Turkmens and Uzbeks, and indicate the many different genetic origins of these people. Amongst them we find mentioned the Kasak-Ili, who were of Kirgis origin. They were a fiercely independant race of steppe-dwellers who were readily induced to take up mercenary employment with the prospect of easy plunder.
These unrelated tribal elements who, after the conquest of the declining Timurid empire, settled in the region around the Oxus river, merged with the original Iranian poputaltion of the area and gave birth to the people that we know today as the Uzbeks.
In 1500 Schaibani conquered Bochara and in the following years expelled the Chagatay from the Fergana Valley. He died, a martyr to the Sunni Muslim faith, on the battlefield whils fighting, in allegiance with the Osman Empire, against Shah Ismail of Persia, from whom he had previously demanded, in vain, that he cease to force the Shiite religion upon the Persian people. After the death of Schaibani, Samarkand and Bochara were for a shot time occupied by Babur, the successor to Timur. It was during this time that the Uzbeks retreated to the town of Turkestan, where the patron saint of the Uzbek and Turkic tribes, Ahmed Jesewi lies buried.
Baburs occupation of Samarkand and Bochara lasted for only two years before towns were retaken by Ubayd-Allah, a nephew of Schaibani. Babur fled to India where he founded the famous Islamic empire of the Moguls. Under Ubayd-Allah, who was an ideal ruler in that he honoured both the nomadic and the Islamic tradition, the capital was moved from Samarkand to Bochara.
Ubayd-Allah united Transoxianian, and Chwarezm and Chorassan were incorporated into his empire. His death in 1598, and that of his son Abdul-Mumir, marked the end of the Schaibani dynasty. Under the Schaibani the social order of the Uzbeks was extensively determined by established nomadic tribal traditions. The areas that they conquered were known as their "Yurt"; that of the Manghit lay on the Serafshan river; Uzbeks, descendant from the Turkman tribe, settled in the Naratan mountains; and the territory of the Quarluqs lay south of the Amu-Darya. The heads of these tribes elected a leader, or were forced to accept a leader, whos right it was to erect his yurt in the capital Samarkand and, later on, Bochara.
By the beginning of the 17th centur, the art and culture of Turkestan was already at a decline. This was caused, to an extent, by the fact that the old caravan routes (the Silk Route), connecting Turkestan to the West and the Occident, had lost in importance becaue of the development of the sea route to India and the East-West route from Russia over Siberia. This period is also marked by a series of bloody civil wars; the power had passed to the Ashtar-Khanid dynasty (1599 - 1747), who were too weak to preserve the political unity of Turkestan, and the empire disintegrated into many feudal Khanates whose rules continuously waged war upon one another.
The disintegration of Turkestan was to a great extent due to the transformation of isolated, nomadic winter quarters into permanent settlements, ruled by self-goerning, nomadic chieftans. The extensive Uzbek provinces severed themselves from the Empire and became independant. Of the major Khanates, only the Khanate of Chorassan managed to preserve its political of the 16th century when the Amu-Darya changed its course and the flourishing oasis was transformed into a desert. As a consequence, the capital of the Khanate was moved from Urgenc to Khiva. During this period, Abdul-Ghazi a Khan of Khiva, composed a report on Turkestan and on the Uzbeks and Turkomen who made up the military force of the Khans of Khiva.
The struggle between the Khanates and the small feudal princedoms was carried on unsuccessfully by the Manghit dynasty in Bochara (1747 - 1868), who replaced the Gengizid title of Khan with the Arab title "Emir". The tribal pasturelands that had been traditionally divided amongst nomadic sub-tribes, were annexed by the Emire, the self-styled "shadows of God". Under Shah-Murad (1785 - 1800), orthodox pietism reached ist culmination. He reigned, dressed like a dervish in rags and gave up all luxries and distributed his ancestral legacy amongst those from whom it had been removed.
The last, most terrifying on Shiite Persia, took place during his reign, and the slave markets of Turkestan were filled with counless Persian captives. Nasrulla (1826 - 1860) atempted, as his ancestors had done previously - to establish a centralized power over Turkestan. The methods that he used, proved him to one of the most fiercesom despots that Asia had known. He destroyed Merv, put all of his captives to death and then proceeded to occupy the country of the Qungrat Uzbeks in Schachrisabs and the western part of the Khanate of Kokand (Ferganan). Only Khiva remained unconquered.
Russia had, by the middle of the 15th century, managed to shake off the yoke of Mongol rule and had taken possession of the formal Mongol Khanates of Kazan and Astrakhan. The importance of Turkestan as a gateway to India and the reports of gold dicovered near the Amu-Daya, had induced Peter the First to send military expeditions to Khiva. These reached their goal but were annihilated. Russian raids against the Kazaks in the country to the north and north-east of the Khanates made it possible for them, by the middle of the 19th century, to surround the territory of turkestan on three sides. In the years following the conquest of the towns of Turkestan, Tschikment and Taschkent, in 1864 and 1865, a revolt of the Kirgis and Kiptschak-Uzbeks brought about the conquest of the remainder of the Khanate of Kokand by the Russians, who retained the old name of Fergana for the area.
Popular reaction to the news of the march of General Tschernjajevs army on Bochara persuaded Emir Muzaffarud-din (1860 - 1885) to declare, contrary to his will, a religious war against and Bochara became a Russian protectorate. With the assistance of the Russians, the Emir was then able to accomplish the long desired annexations of the territories of Hissar, Sachrisabs and Badakhshan. He suppressed all opposition by public executions, but was not able to prevent the development of underground opposition groups, who after the Russian Revotution in 1917, joined up with the Bolsheviks and drove out Muzaffarud-Din, who fled with his followers, in 1920, to Afghanistan.
In 1924, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Uzbekistan was founded. This is made up of parts of the Emirate of Bochara, the Khanate of Khiva and the area conquered by the Russians in 1864 and 1865, and exists until the present day.

Introduction
The invasion of Central Asia and the West by Gengis Khan in the 13th century had a profound effect upon the shifting and mixing of tribal units. Nomadic sub-tribes, seduced by the prospects of plunder, moved from their traditional tribal areas and in the process became affiliated with many diverse tribal units. The adoption of ethnically unrelated patterned was bound to occur. This, combined with the influence of the Iranian culture of their new-found homelands, resulted in the vast variety of patterns and is found today in Uzbek textiles.
The Uzbeks were formed by a historical process and cannot, as in the case of the Turkmen and Kazaks, be regarded as an ethnic/social affiliation. We can, however, isolate one pattern (illustration on cover) that appears to be common to the many Uzbek sub-tribes: this is referred to by Moschkova as the “Tschodor Muiis” (Tschodor horns), the “Art Ajagi” (leg of a horse), and the “Serbab Nuskagi” (velvet design). The term “Tschodor Muiis” can possibly indicate a common origin with the Turkmen tribe of that name, or it could reflect the theory that a conquered tribe was obliged to incorporate the family göl (emblem of the conqueror into its designs). “At Ajagi” it difficult to explain, for the göl appears to have little in common with its appellation, and the Serbab Nuskagi presents us contain this pattern.
Affinities with the designs on bronze mirrors of the “Shan” period and the mandalas on Tibetan thank as “suggest” another hypothesis which might lead us back to the Tamgen (emblems of tribal chieftains) of the early Turkic tribes of the Altai region. We might further theorize that this pattern represented the family or tribal emblem of the chieftain who first brought together the various sub-tribes that today are known collectively as Uzbeks.
From the 16^th century onwards, the nomadic Uzbeks have been gradually assimilated into the urban culture of the main oasis towns, and today only a fraction of the tribe has retained its traditional nomadic way of life. The true nomad despises the city dweller, and his fierce independence shows itself both politically and culturally. 
The integration of the Uzbeks into a semi-industrial society had a profound effect upon the social order of the family.
Embroidery, which in nomadic cultures is always considered the woman´s domain, was taken up by male urban Uzbeks who, in the workshops of the major cities of Uzbekistan, replaced women in the production of the famous embrioidered hangings an covers.

The stylistic representation of these symbols, particularly in the work of the Lakai tribe, would seem to be the producht of a mystical hallucinatory state of mind or as Bruce Chadwick states in "Animal Style", "the similarities between hallucinatory experience and nomadic art cannot be explained as pure chance". The suppression of religious belief and the emphasis on the material world that came with the colonization of Central Asia brought about the final dissolution of the traditional way of life the nomadic Uzbeks. It is only through the eloquence of their artistic that we can hope to understand their past and appreciate the proud people who ruled the steppes of Central Asia.

The nomadic tradition of the Uzbeks was already on the decline when Vambery, Olufson and other western travellers visited the area in the 19th century.

The birth of a child was preceded by elaborate precautuons to ensure that malicious sprits were kept away from the mother and her unborn child. A triangular amulet contaning prayers was hung around her neck, and often an owl was brought into the yurt to frighten away evil spirits.

Namat

Excavations in the Russian Altai and the accounts of early Chinese travellers and pilgrims amplify the theory that felt rugs predate all knotted and wovon products. Felt provided the nomad with the material for his yurt, for the floor covering of his home, for the decoration of his camels and protected him and his horse against the extrem ecold of the Central Asian winter. The wovon fabric used by the Kutschis of southern Afghanistan and northern Pakistan would not have been sufficient to protect the steppedweller from the sub-zero temperature that he had to contend with in the high mountain valleys where he pastured his sheep.

Rugs

It was rare to find an Uzbek pile rug in the famous carpet bazaars of Bochara and Samarkand. The products of the Turkman tribes, in particular the Ersaris, dominated the markets. 

The rugs of the Turkman Uzbeks in the Nurata region differ in structure and pattern from those of the other Uzbek tribes; their Dschulchirs have a high pile, but are made with a conventional Turkish knot.

Killims

Beshkashta tentbands of the Turkman Uzbek of the Fergana valley suggest affinities with the Turkman in the Caspian region. Many of the patterns (rams horns and rhomboids) are identical, and the predominant use of dark red (Krapp plant) and dark blue (Indigo) dyes is common to both people.

Lakai

The difference between the embroideries of this group and those of the Lakai is comparable to the difference between a sonnet and free verse. In the frist group the artist is restricted to basic geometric forms and seeks to overcome the selfimposed limitations by the skllful use of colour and contrast.
In the latter the artist accepts the responsibility of a reater degree of freedom and creates his own framework around a personal interpretation of traditional tribal motives. The emigration of the Lakai tribe to Afghanistan had a great influence on the embroidery of their new neighbors.

Belt - Strips

Town Life
Bochara, Samarkand an Tachkent, the main towns of Turkestan and Uzbekistan, resembled in many ways those of mediaval Europe. High fortified walls surrounded the town, and covered bazaars encircled the citadel, or palace, of the ruler.

Clothing and Jewelry
The clothing of the inhabitants of Central Asia was to a great extent dicated by environment and climate.

The Ikats of Uzbekistan

The Emirat of Bochara, independent until 1920, but which after the Russian conquest of 1868 had lost a large part of its territory, exercised a great spiritual and commercial influence in Central Asia.

 Acknowledgements:
We humbly dedicate this catalogue to Shirak, whose spirit and continued presence played an essential part towards our understanding of the eastern culture.
We are grateful to the following people, without whose help and contributions this catalogue might never have been completed.
Nic Townsend
Otto Stadler
Kurt Krause
J. P. Gerspach
Mme. M. r. Nicod
Noor Sher, Mir - Ayaz, Ismatullah Maxum, Ghulam Sidig from Afghanistan, who assisted us with the purchase of a larger part of this collechtion.
And of course our wives Undine and Marianne.
Lörrach- Tüllingen, 20. May 1975
David Lindahl   Thomas Knorr

Uzbek

The textiles and life of the nomadic 

and sedentary Uzbek tribes of

Central - Asia

Printed in Switzerland