I would have to agree with Kazak. The rug really just doesn't look that old. I think the best suggestion I could say about this is to take it to someone locally. I'm not necessarily saying this wasn't worth the money. It's just that this is the kind of piece that would need to be looked at in person. The weft, the warp, they both look so white. The fringe knotting and appearance of the wool really just looks new. There's no hint of an aged patina. That's not to say that the cotton is just reflecting a lot of light to make it look bleach white, but even with a carpet stored for some time, you would see some slight tinting.
Additionally, the tags on the rug bear some weight too. They're usually put on the rug right after weaving/pre-export. It's a newer tag. One of these two tags has what appears to be a date, but it's really not worth translating. There is no date woven into the actual rug, and even on some select rugs, dates really don't help. Sometimes they're wrong, illegible, re-woven, or simply copied designs of older rugs.
Although the rug has a hint of oxidation on the tips of the wool, this means little. the only thing that would allude to age with this rug is the blue border, but really wouldn't take it back too far. Most rugs pre 1915 vintage would not feature so much pink. I think this may be synthetic dyes. The colors used overall hint to a much later vintage. Oldest I would put this is 1930's, and I think that may be generous, although again, this really should be looked at in person. These Hamadan types are much different than the more commonly and easily identifiable rugs such as peshawar, chobi, kashan, mashad, nain, etc. The black/charcoal/brown and blue mix in the field is known as abrash. Doesn't necessarily help attribute age really, even somewhat common in this genre of rug. What I can say is it's an allover field design, each of these geometric simplified "paisley" like designs are known as botehs.
