Very true, it's pretty incredible how attached people can become with their rugs sometimes. It's a little mysterious in a way - more often than not, you never can really place what a rug is, there's usually no signature, no specific attribution. Perhaps this is part of the lure of these rugs.
I wrote a paper not too long ago which I may ask the editors of RugRag to post, it has to do with "who is the artist" in regards to Oriental Rugs. I made the argument that within the last century of rug making the production has accommodated for certain demands within the United States. This goes for coloring, designs etc. More often than not, these rugs are created without an intended buyer, but just a general reactionary supply for what people like. The point was if a rug is designed by a rug mapper (colors, execution and all) in accordance for demand, then given to a weaver to produce, perhaps the artist is the consumer themselves, as they're the ones integrating this carpet into their homes. Well, the argument in the paper was a little more persuasive than this, but you get the idea... I'll have to ask RugRag to post it.
Just on a side note, I recently went to a photography auction with Edward Weston, I couldn't believe the estimates which had been given on some of these prints. Granted, it is Edward Weston, and not to belittle the work of this skilled photographer, but these are prints derived from negatives which could have been replicated several times. The point I'm trying to make here I guess has to do with how depreciated I believe the Persian Rug market is. It's pretty incredible the time that goes into weaving these pieces, and yet many of these prime examples don't fetch half of what an 8x10 contact print may sell for.