What's New in Old American Indian Art

The Perfect Navajo Collection

2011-12-14T11:17:00.004-07:00

Every collector wants to have the best things available within their particular budget. And every collector has their own idea of what the "best" really is. We have our own ideas, of course, and thought it might be interesting for readers to see what the talking heads at Turkey Mountain Traders consider to be the components to as near a perfect collection of Navajo Indian jewelry as finances will allow.

THE OLD STUFF

FIRST PHASE BELT--A really fine First Phase concho belt is the cornerstone of every major collection. Even if it isn't worn, it can be hung on a wall to serve as a piece of great art. And if the money allows for a great Second Phase as well, even better.

CLASSIC SQUASH BLOSSOM NECKLACE--Any really high quality piece from the pre-1920 era will work. With stones or without is not as important as the overall quality of the piece.

TURQUOISE NECKLACE--The original Indian jewelry. An old tab necklace with pump-drilled stones is hard to find, but well worth the effort.

CLASSIC BRACELETS--optimally, an all-silver with repousse would be included, as would one with a turquoise-set plate on a band. And a really fine row bracelet, because it is such an important form.

RING--here, it is a personal choice. It is far more important to have one you like that fits well than to have something "important and great" that you hate wearing.

OLD EARRINGS--Old Navajo earrings are rare, but a pair of pyroform drops, hoop-and-balls or pierced crescents should be in there. If you prefer and aren't as much of a purist as to origin, a great pair of Pueblo wirework earrings would be fine.

OTHER THINGS--important but rare objects such as manta pins, headstalls, outstanding buttons and early silver boxes are things that might never be worn, but they tell a great story about the development of the art. Plus, they're a lot of fun to look at.

THE LATER STUFF

A STONE SQUASH BLOSSOM NECKLACE--One thing about pieces made in the 1930s, 40s and 50s is that the turquoise is often superior to that found in earlier pieces. Many of the highly important classic mines were opened or became commercially viable in that era, and pieces with incredible Blue Gem, #8 and Bisbee turquoise can be found. You can also find 1970s pieces with amazing turquoise, but be careful to find pieces where the quality of the silverwork is also high (such as Carl Luthy studio pieces).

A PINE SPRINGS SANDCAST PIECE (probably a bracelet)--The silversmiths working near Pine Springs, Arizona in the 1925-50 period produced some of the finest cast pieces ever made on the reservation. John Adair went to Pine Springs to watch people like Tom Burnsides and Charlie Houck work, and in his incomparably valuable book on Indian silversmiths commented on the quality of the sandcasting done there.

A GREAT CLUSTER BRACELET--we're kind of cheating here, because the best ones were Zuni made, but the Navajo are known to wear them at every fancy dress opportunity.

A FRED HARVEY BRACELET--they are not major pieces, but to have a Navajo collection without a tourist trade piece would be ignoring the thousands of smiths who made them. Some of them, especially the ones with petrified wood, are actually quite nice.

EARLY SIGNED PIECES--Navajo smiths started hallmarking in the 1930s, and pieces by Fred Peshlakai, Austin Wilson and Ambrose Roanhorse are both important and incredibly well-done.

MODERNIST PIECES--by which we are mainly talking about White Hogan and Navajo Guild pieces from the 1940s and 1950s. The all-silver pieces done by the Guild are supremely elegant, and the White Hogan work of Kenneth Begay and the Kee brothers has been discussed at length in every study of the art.

THE MODERN STUFF

THE BIG GUNS--modern Indian jewelry is very much name-driven. The finest jewelers have established their own styles, and can charge a premium for their work (especially if they work in gold). The absolute top of the ladder is occupied by people like Lee Yazzie, Raymond Yazzie, Vernon Haskie, James Little, Perry Shorty and Ric Charlie. There are other smiths doing very fine work, but those are some of the people who are more likely to be the big names people want in 30 or 40 years.

Future days for the website

2011-09-09T11:35:00.001-07:00

Usually, I take the time in the blog to tell you things about our material. This time, I'm diverging from the norm a bit. I'd like to tell you some things about our website, and what you can expect from it in the future.

We have been somewhat aggressive in keeping our website as low-tech as possible, mainly because we have a deep-seated fear of complexity. To us, browsing the website should be a fun trip into a world we all enjoy, not a slog through an incomprehensible technological nightmare. This means no drop-down menus, and a cap on the number of items on the site at once. It means a website visitor can't see our entire inventory, but it also means that they can make it through everything they want to see without a bathroom break in the middle.

But, time marches on, and there are things we want to do with our website that require (gasp!) increased complexity. One of those things will involve videos, where we can speak directly to viewers and use some of our pieces to illustrate our points. We can hopefully do this without too much website revamping, and it should be ready to go in the next two or three months.

If you have any thoughts on the direction you would like the website to take, or any other features you would like us to include, please drop us a line any time. I don't think a streaming video feed from the gallery is in the cards, because nobody really wants to see what is going on there at two in the morning, but just about anything else is up for discussion.

A Return to the Land of Buttons

2011-04-13T10:13:00.013-07:00

A few years ago, we were lucky enough to be able to offer the Jay Evetts collection of Indian silver buttons and dress ornaments. It was the finest private collection of its type, put together over a span of 35 years by one of the most respected traders in the business. The finest examples from the collection have long since passed into private and museum hands, and it is not likely that we will ever see their like again.

Here's Jay, in all his glory.

The only way to find buttons and ornaments of that quality is to wait for them to come out of nowhere, which never happens, or to see if some of Jay's pieces come back on the market. That is what has happened, and we are again proud to offer three incredibly fine pairs from his collection. These were among the best pieces he had, and were sold before the collection was offered publicly in Santa Fe--making them completely fresh to the market.

The pair on the right is the largest and most "typical" of the three pairs--it is a large and very well-made pair of moccasin buttons, circa 1930. Each button is 2 13/16" in diameter, which is at the upper end size-wise for Navajo buttons.

Here is a closer view of the pair, showing the marvelous stampwork edges and repousse sunburst design in the middle. The turquoise are a wonderful pale blue with just a hint of black matrix. It is one of the finest pairs of large buttons from that era known to exist, and was one of the highlights of his collection. $1600 with custom stand (KN MH/006)

The center pair are not true buttons, but rather dress ornaments. The only difference between ornaments and buttons to the Navajo, who did not use buttons in the traditional sense, was the number of sew loops on the back--buttons had one in the center, while ornaments had two or more on the back. Both were used purely for decoration, especially when they were this large.

Each ornament is 2 1/4" high, and nicely decorated with stampwork and repousse. They date to circa 1930, and include some absolutely gorgeous Lone Mountain turquoise. Of all the pieces in Jay's collection, this pair contained the finest turquoise. $1500 with custom stand (KN MH/007)

Finally, the most dramatic of the three pairs. Technically, they are ornaments because of the pair of sew loops on the back, but the distinction is not important. What is important is the incredible quality of the silverwork.

By style and technique, this pair can be attributed to the Goodluck family, and are the only attributable ornaments in the entire collection. The quality of the work is absolutely incredible, and the scale of the ornaments (2 1/2" high) is quite imposing. They would look at home on a top quality concho belt, but there is no evidence that they were ever made as anything other than a pair of ornaments. They date to circa 1940, and are SOLD with custom stand. (KN MH/003)

For those of you who are looking for something slightly smaller in Navajo buttons, we have the collection below, all of which were collected at the Oljato Trading Post in Utah before 1940. Prices on them vary, but range from $10 up to $100 for the largest and most elaborate. If any interest you, give us a call and we can pick some out for you.

Every picture tells a story, some more than one.

2011-02-07T13:44:00.015-07:00

We've handled a lot of squash blossom necklaces over the years, ranging in quality from the ridiculous (we try to keep those to a minimum) to the sublime. Tens of thousands of them were made, mostly in the 1960s and 1970s, and it has become the one thing that springs to mind when people think of Indian jewelry. The basic configuration has remained unchanged for over a century--silver beads and 3 or 4 petal blossoms, with a naja at the bottom. Some have no turquoise at all, some have turquoise set in the naja, and some have turquoise all over. The differences lie in the details, and it is often impossible to see what makes one better than another until you actually hold and compare the two.

We aren't good enough at this internet thing for you to be able to hold a piece through the computer, but using a lot of close-up photos is a pretty good substitute. And with this particular squash blossom necklace, every picture has something very interesting to say.

Here is N 1705, a Navajo squash blossom necklace from circa 1905-1915. At first glance, the most unusual thing about it is the crosspiece with three set turquoise above the naja. An unusual feature, to be sure, but there is a lot more to learn from this piece.

If you look closely at the stones on the ends of the naja's arms, you can see that the bezel looks a bit wrinkled. In other pieces of this age, the bezel would have notches cut out so that the thin silver could be folded over the stone. This smith cut in some notches, but made them very small, so from a distance the bezel appears to be one of the smooth bezels that Navajo smiths learned to make ten years later. The other four stones have bezels that look even smoother and better done, but on close inspection each bezel has a little nick or imperfection that allowed the smith to smooth out the silver--still, they are more skillfully done than the two at the terminals, which leaves open the possibility that the crosspiece and the stone drop in the middle were added on to the naja a few years after it was originally made. We can't say for sure, but it was not at all uncommon for Navajo jewelry to be modified to fit the changing tastes of the owner, who was probably a relative of the smith.

From the reverse, you can see some really interesting things about the naja. First, the tri-wires
are clearly hand-drawn (note the unevenness of the flat surfaces). Second, the thin wire set in the middle is not actual ropework, as would be expected in a piece from the 1920s or later. Instead, it is a single wire that is smooth on the back, which means that the "twisting" pattern on the front was done by scoring with a chisel or file. Not easy to do, especially with such a thin wire. And finally, the label on the back is some sort of collection number, most likely from a museum. It could have been left to a museum in 1965 (hence the "65" at the beginning) and then deaccessioned later on. Since many museums started life as large private collections, and were run as such up until very recent times, it is not surprising or uncommon to find pieces that show signs of being part of one at one time or another. Though this necklace is of museum quality, a local historical society or non-Indian museum would have no use for a piece like this and would deaccession it to raise funds for more appropriate acquisitions.

Here is a closer look at the faux ropework on the front of the naja. Notice how when it is viewed up-close, the irregular spacing of the notches becomes clear.

The other interesting part of the necklace is the beads and blossoms. Towards the bottom, here is how they appear:

The beads have raised seams in the middle which have been filed flat. The round part of the blossoms shows less of a raised seam, which means thay could have been done by a different smith. Oddly, the flat part of the blossoms is untouched on one edge, but notched on the other.

When you go higher up the string of beads, you see a change (which I marked with an arrow).

The higher beads (on the left) are slightly smaller and rounder. At some point, probably pretty early in its life, this necklace either broke and was restrung with some smaller beads, or was lengthened (quite a bit) with the smaller beads. The small beads are quite old and well-done, and it is a time-honored tradition among the Navajo to maintain their necklaces by restringing them when necessary, so it only adds another chapter to the interesting history of the piece. Also, two of the blossoms are missing a petal, with only two instead of the original three. We don't know exactly what happened along the road, but clearly this is a piece that has had an eventful life.

The necklace has a straight length of 28", and the naja is 2 9/16" wide. The special internet price on it is SOLD. If you have any questions about it, please give us a call.

The answer to a common question

2011-01-11T10:17:00.009-07:00

After "Can I use the bathroom?" and "What's your dog's name?" the most commonly asked question in our gallery is "Which piece is the oldest?" When our entire inventory is taken into account, the answer is this:

It is an Iroquois beaded bag that dates to circa 1820, and since the Navajo weren't producing metal jewelry at that time, none of our silver can match that. But if you limit the selection to jewelry, here is the winner:

This pair of copper hoops has a very interesting history. Most of our pieces come from private collections where they were appreciated and treasured. Sometimes, they weren't understood, but the owners at least knew they were around. With this pair of earrings, neither was the case. They were found in a drawer, in a very interesting location--Fort Huachuca, Arizona. Fort Huachuca dates back to 1877, which is probably about when these earrings were made. The fort is not in Navajo country, but it is certainly in Apache country, and trade between the Apaches and Navajo, both willing and unwilling, was extremely common in the 19th Century.
The copper wire hangers are recent additions, of course.

The wire has clearly been hand-worked--note the "seam" visible in the photo above at about 7 o'clock. There is also pitting that is consistent with someone working copper in a somewhat crude fashion.

Items like this can be very difficult to date, but the hand-worked character of these hoops, coupled with the wear and filework you can see on the ends, make anything other than a 1865-1880 date unlikely. The collection history also makes a 20th Century date nearly impossible, because Indian trade at the fort (which is not exactly located in a bustling population center, even by Arizona standards) would have been essentially shut down in the 20th Century.

Here is the earrings without the hanging wires. You can see the tapering ends, very characteristic of early hoop earrings. For anyone interested in wearable history, this pair of earrings is a real treasure. They are just over 1 1/4" in diameter, and actually are
more of a coppery color than shows in the photos. Their price is $895.

If you have any questions about them, please give us a call at (480) 423-8777. We are very proud of them--they are some of the earliest we have seen. To see another pair of early copper earrings, go to page 103 of the Frank and Holbrook book for a hammered pair in the Fred Harvey collection at the Heard Museum. There are also many examples of similar hoops done in silver throught the book.

The Final Piece of the Month for 2010

2010-12-30T11:38:00.007-07:00

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water--the Piece of the Month is back.

This is a bracelet that I've been dying to feature for quite a while, because it has some things that require careful study (and detailed photos).

This is B TD/22, which on the surface is a very fine example of a Navajo row bracelet on twisted wire, circa 1920. It has excellent weight (84 grams, which as those of you who have read the latest Steve's Insider Info already know is a good weight for a piece from this era).

The stones are slightly domed cabs, not as high as you usually see in pieces from the 1920s. In fact, some of the stones look more like the nearly flat ones seen on pieces from circa 1910. And when you look closely, there is something else:

If you look carefully at the circled stones, you can see that they seem to have bezels within bezels. The outer bezels are relatively smooth, while the inner ones are serrated.

In all, 5 of the 9 stones have this double bezel. Technically, there is no reason for the smith to have done this--unless he was using previously set stones from an earlier piece. It is a great example of Navajo recycling, where an earlier item would be re-used in another way. It happens with turquoise beads set into bracelets or rings, and here it looks like stones were taken from an earlier bracelet and re-set on to this one.

Maybe the original bracelet broke beyond repair, or maybe the smith just needed the stones to complete this bracelet and didn't like the look of the earlier piece. Whatever the case, it makes this one of the more interesting bracelets we have ever owned.

The inside size is 5 7/8" with a 1" opening. It wears small, because it is shaped more round than other bracelets, but it can be re-shaped to fit. It would fit into any collection, because it is both a great example of the type and highly unusual. The special New Year's price is $1750.

We love talking about interesting pieces, so please give us a call with any questions.

A Holiday look at...us.

2010-12-13T12:25:00.006-07:00

I usually take this space to highlight new acquisitions and share some of our knowledge and opinions about old Indian art, but this time I thought it might be good to actually introduce ourselves to those of you who haven't actually met us. We've had the opportunity to speak with most of our clients, but there are some people that know us from the website and our email address, so I'd just like to put a face on the names for you.

This is Max. He's 14, and lives with Tom and Deborah.

And here is Lily, who is 16 and lives with Steve and his family. Steve's other two dogs, Jasper and Riley, don't usually come to the gallery, but Max and Lily can be found there on most days hunting down chewy treats and keeping everyone safe from tennis balls.

These are the illustrious co-founders of TMT, Tom and Deborah Begner. We got this photo in one take.

And here's Steve Begner, the one responsible for the website and this blog. This was not the first take for this picture, and photo editing was used heavily.

From all of us at Turkey Mountain Traders, Happy Holidays and a joyful and prosperous New Year. The next blog post will have things rather than people, we promise.

To Chee or Not to Chee

2010-12-10T10:08:00.012-07:00

Sorry about the title. Now that I've gotten that out of my system, I'll be okay.

Among serious collectors of American Indian silver, few artists bring out such opposite reactions as Mark Chee. Those who love him point to his incredibly solid silverwork and bold styling, as well as the outstanding turquoise he normally would use. Those who aren't so crazy about him call his pieces overly heavy, and point to some of his pieces that are, shall we say, not quite so successful from an artistic point of view. He was prone to bad days at the bench, certainly, so all of his pieces were definitely not created equal.

Still, when he had his A game working, he was an extremely skillful smith who used some of the best turquoise and thickest silver available. His preference for leaving the turquoise in more natural shapes is quite different from the finely shaped stones used by people like Peshlakai, and the sheer carat weight of his stones was far beyond that of any other prominent smith of his day.

Here is a bracelet that shows all that is good about Chee's work:

Our gram scale tops out at 120 grams, and this piece is heavier than that. I would guess around 140 grams, which for any other smith would be gargantuan. For Chee, it's about average for one of his row bracelets on tri-wires. The stone is beautifully matrixed Royston with a bluish-green tinge, all five pieces being very nicely matched. It was made somewhere between 1950 and 1975--Chee had a long career, so dating his pieces can be tricky.

The bracelet was a gift from the noted Indian Art dealer Lovena Ohl to a family member as a 16th birthday present almost 30 years ago. Ohl was renowned for her discerning eye for quality, and she certainly upheld her standards with this piece. The stampwork is clean, and the shaping of the stones, while variable, is still very much balanced from side to side.

As always, one of the best things about this bracelet is the hallmark--Chee's typical "fat eagle" hallmark is one of the most distinctive in the business.

Everything there is to love about Chee's work, with none of his defects (except for the heavy weight, which is only bad if you like your bracelets to be feathery and light). The inside size is 5 5/16" with a 1 1/4" opening, so it fits small to medium women's wrists. It is 1 5/8" wide at its widest, and tapers down to 15/16" at the ends. The price is SOLD, and it would be perfect for any collector who is looking for an exemplary piece of his work.

If you have any questions about this piece or Chee's work in general, please give us a call.

We wish there were more of these in the world, but there aren't.

2010-12-07T11:49:00.010-07:00

Today, let's look at one of the most special things we have ever had the privilege of handling. Not the most expensive, certainly, but possibly the rarest.

These are Navajo tab earrings. Turquoise tab earrings are not at all uncommon, though ones of this age (circa 1890-1920) are rare treasures. They are pump-drilled, as can be seen in both photos--the person doing the drilling started on one side and drilled out a conical hole, then turned the stone over and drilled through from the other side. It is much more time-consuming to do it this way than to use an electric drill, which produced an evenly round hole. Very few pump-drilled beads were made after the widespread introduction of power tools after World War II, for obvious reasons. The copper wire wrap was done early (possibly not original, because it is very possible that these tabs started life on a necklace, but definitely original to their use as earrings). The half-dome buttons with the earring posts are recent additions, but the buttons are at least as old as the tabs.

Beyond the age, beauty and size (the tabs are 13/16" long, and the total hanging length of the earrings is 1 1/2"), these are the only old tab earrings we have ever seen that are made of azurite. Azurite is, according to Wikipedia, "a soft, deep blue copper mineral produced by weathering of copper ore deposits." With the profusion of copper deposits in the Southwest, it is understandable that some would end up in Navajo jewelry, and there are contemporary pieces that incorporate this mineral. But historically it is rare, like the garnets that show up (very infrequently) in old pieces. Since it was not mined commercially like turquoise, maybe that can be explained by a simple lack of supply. Whatever the reason, this pair is the only one we have seen.

The provenance is rather nice, as well--they came from the estate of Larry Frank, the well-known collector and author of INDIAN SILVER JEWELRY OF THE SOUTHWEST 1868-1930. Larry was legendary for his dogged pursuit of the rare and important in old Indian silverwork, as anyone who knew him can attest, and these certainly fit the bill. We were very lucky to acquire them, and we offer them with great pride. SOLD.

Please call or email with any questions.

Another Piece of the Month

2010-10-21T11:31:00.006-07:00

Since Steve got bored and the previous Piece of the Month has sold, he decided to shorten the month and do another one. So, here it is.

This Navajo bracelet is like many others in that it is a ridged band with a turquoise setting. Many were made, and they are not difficult to find. However, this is a very unusual piece in many ways. First, the turquoise setting is placed on a plate with cast fleur-de-lis projections--not a common detail at all. Second, the heavy and even stamping on the outside of each outer ridge is an extremely skillful and unusual feature.

But the most interesting thing about this bracelet is the way the ridged band was made. Usually, ridged bands made by the Navajo at this time (circa 1915-20) were made in one of three ways: casting, filing a solid band, or joining multiple tri-wires. This piece was done by joining three hand-drawn tri-wires. Usually, this was done by joining the wires at the ends with a strip of silver. This would create the effect of a solid band, although in reality the tri-wires would only be joined together at two points. Though the wires might be touching all the way around the bracelet, they were not actually soldered together. A line would be visible from both the inside and the outside. But as you can see in the photo below, no such line is visible from the outside of this bracelet.

To fill the gaps between the wires, this smith did something we have not seen elsewhere--he took thin strips of silver and soldered them on the inside of the bracelet, creating a single solid band all the way around. The strips are clearly visible in the photo below.

This took quite a bit of work, and the result is absolutely beautiful--one of the most stylish and interesting Navajo bracelets we have owned.

The inside size of this bracelet is 5 1/2" with a 1 1/4" opening, and it can certainly be adjusted. It weighs in at an impressive 86.6 grams. As our Piece of the Month, the special price is $1875.

For more information, please call at (480) 423-8777 or drop us an email.

Piece of the Month--the bracelet that Perry loved.

2010-09-30T11:03:00.009-07:00

This is our first Piece of the Month, where we take a piece and give our own view on it, including a special price.

Sometimes, a piece comes along that kind of gets lost. Maybe it's because it isn't a huge and dramatic thing, or maybe it doesn't have a hallmark, or maybe it doesn't photograph well. (Keep in mind that Steve still does all the photography, and he is not a pro by any means.) And sometimes, we have no idea why it doesn't get the attention it deserves. Here is one of those times.

This is B 2256, a Navajo bracelet from circa 1915. It is one of the best old Navajo bracelets we own, and has some really interesting technical points to it. In fact, at Indian Market, Perry Shorty spent 45 minutes looking at it, and said that if he had the time, it was the bracelet he wished he had made.

The first point is that the band is incredibly deeply filed--the artist took a solid band and filed three deep grooves into it, leaving two triangular ridges and two smaller ridges on the edges. He then filed in hatching on the side ridges, giving it the appearance of ropework. But the really difficult part was yet to come--he went into the center groove, where he had left a bit more silver than in the two outer grooves, and filed in some faux ropework there as well. It would have been much easier for him to file out all of the silver and create three equal grooves, which is the more common approach, but he did not take the easy way out. Had he cast the band, it would have been far easier for him to create something with ridges without having to go through the laborious process of filing.

In the circled area, you can see the faux ropework inside the center groove. All the decoration has been done with a file--if he had used a stamp on the edges, all the hatching would be the same. Note the small variations in the hatching, as well as in the center faux ropework.

Another area where the artist went the extra yard was in setting the stones. It would have been more typical for him to set five stones, leaving open space at the ends. Instead, he set an extra two stones on the terminals, which is extremely uncommon in early Navajo bracelets.

The circled area in this picture shows the extra stone set on the terminal. Note the early, thick bezels. It is also important to note that the faux ropework does not continue under the stone setting--if it did, that could easily mean that the stone had been set well after the bracelet was originally made.

This is a bracelet that could be worn by a woman with a small to average wrist, and can be sized to fit. It is a piece that rewards careful study, and the more you examine it the more you realize what a great piece it really is. The Piece of the Month price is SOLD.

As always, we love talking about the fine details of our pieces. Please feel free to call or email with any questions or comments.

Back from Santa Fe

2010-08-27T13:10:00.002-07:00

As we do every year, TMT spent a good part of August in Santa Fe. We exhibited at the Whitehawk Antique Indian Show, as we have for the past 15 years (give or take--it's been a long time). It was a very interesting show, and here are some of our impressions:

1. People don't buy online like they used to. That's not to say that people are not buying antique American Indian art through online auctions any more, because they are. But some time ago, there was a question as to whether online auction sites would take a huge chunk out of the business of traditional dealers. The simple answer is yes--and no.

Five years ago, it was a common business model for someone to start selling items online and make that their full-time profession. It can still be done, but the market for the fine antiques we all love has proven to be more complex than that. In fact, the movement of sellers from shows to online has kind of gone into reverse, as high-level sellers has come to realize that nothing can take the place of a personal relationship between buyer and seller; we have actually seen a number of people who used to sell exclusively online coming to shows with their items.

There is still a healthy online market for items at a lower price point. But nearly every collector who is looking to build a collection of fine items has realized that people who know their material (and will stand behind it with both their reputation and their pocketbook) are the best sources.

2. The sky has fallen, but only a bit. In many ways, this Whitehawk show was the oddest we have ever attended--especially since it was the first one in years with empty booths. The economic conditions of the past 18 months have hit everyone, and our industry is no different. It was sad to count off the people who were not exhibiting this year, and while not all absences were due to economics, money was definitely a driving factor for a lot of people. A number of dealers who had less extensive inventories could not make the numbers add up, and sat this one out. Still, all things considered, it would not have surprised anyone if it had been worse.

3. The good news. One thing that was notable at the show this year was the overall quality. It had been a common complaint in recent years that the items at the Whitehawk show were down in quality. But with the other tribal and Indian show not being held this year, it seemed that most of the dealers brought their "A" game to Whitehawk. And those who set up at the show at El Museo, which was a general art and antiques show not limited to Indian material, also put together attractive and interesting booths. It seems that collectors in most areas of the antique Indian art market have some real choices now, and many are taking advantage.

The overall tenor of the shows was more positive than it has been for some time, which is hardly surprising. The art market in general goes hand in hand with prosperity, of course. It seems that most dealers who handle quality items have come through the bad times more or less intact, and hopefully better times are ahead for all of us.

The age of "good" foreign turquoise

2010-04-30T12:40:00.000-07:00

Many collectors have been told that having American turquoise in a piece of Indian jewelry is necessary for authenticity, and that pieces with foreign stones should be avoided. In the contemporary pieces this might be true, though there are some absolutely beautiful stones being mined overseas. Pieces that incorporate turquoise from the classic American mines are generally quite collectible and valuable, while Chinese turquoise is almost a four-letter word. But with antique material, there is one huge exception that should be in every collector’s knowledge base (and collection): Persian turquoise from the 1890-1930 eras.

Most turquoise in early pieces came from the early mines of the Southwest, such as those around Cerrillos. There is evidence of prehistoric turquoise mining, and there are many accounts of Indians mining turquoise in the 1870s and 1880s. The commercial mining operations at the Cerrillos mines went from the mid-1880s until the collapse of the turquoise market in 1909-1912. (At one point, turquoise had been more expensive than gold, which explains why companies such as Tiffany were so eager to purchase turquoise mines in New Mexico.) After that, very little came from those mines, though there were small-scale mining operations in the area for years.

When the New Mexican mining operations came to an end, the traders needed a source of turquoise for the Navajo and Pueblo silversmiths, and the major Nevada mines had, for the most part, not been opened yet. The only large-scale source of turquoise available was overseas, and so the traders brought in quite a bit of Persian turquoise for the Indians to use. Most of it came in already cut into domed cabochons, which are different from the generally flat pieces the Indians had used previously. (There was, however, Persian turquoise in the Southwest far earlier than that—pieces from the 1890s set with domed cabochons are rare, but not unheard-of.)

With the opening of the big Nevada turquoise mines in the early 1930s, the stream of Persian turquoise slowed down greatly. Most Navajo or Pueblo pieces with Persian turquoise, therefore, can be safely dated between the mid-1910s and the late 1920s. In this time, some of the best pieces of Indian silverwork held turquoise from across the sea, and these pieces are both extremely collectible and highly important in the development of the art.

Another note on "made for sale"

2010-04-15T10:23:00.003-07:00

In 1905, noted trader Juan Lorenzo Hubbell published a "Catalogue and Price List" for "Navajo Blankets & Indian Curios". This was not the first catalog published by a trader--both C. N. Cotton and J. B. Moore had already done so. The Hubbell catalog is not nearly so well known as that of the other traders, but is still worthwhile reading.

The catalog offers a very nice selection of blankets (although no rugs yet; Cotton and Moore were ahead of Hubbell in recognizing the shift towards floor coverings). There is also a selection of Hopi crafts, and even minerals such as "Navajo rubies" (probably garnets). And not least, there is a page devoted to "Navajo Silverware and Jewelry". The prices are very interesting, to say the least.

The items offered include concho belts, bridles, strings of beads, conchos for belt buckles, bracelets "with matrix turquoise", bracelets without settings, and "finger rings". There are no squash blossom necklaces offered for sale, though the catalog photo shows them; the same for ketohs, buttons and spoons. There is no mention or picture of earrings, which were an extremely uncommon product and sale item at that date.

Here are some prices:
Concho belts--$30 to $40
Silver beads--$10 to $35, depending on length of string
Bracelets with turquoise--$2.25 to $10, depending on color and size of stone
Bracelets without turquoise--$1.25 to $1.75 per ounce
Rings with turquoise--$1.25 to $5.00, depending on color and size of stones

Affordable, but not being given away. Considering that a loaf of bread in 1913 cost about 5 cents, spending 100 times that on a ring is equivalent to spending $250 today (considering that a loaf of bread is $2.50 in my supermarket if I'm buying the cheap kind). So, even back then, the traders had a sense that what they were selling was not just cheap tourist junk.

Made for Sale vs. Made for Use

2010-03-26T13:46:00.005-07:00

In the ethnographic antiques trade, items made for native use are almost always treasured more highly than items made for trade or sale. African and Oceanic art has to be “non-tourist” to be truly valuable in the eyes of experienced collectors. And this is indeed true in some areas of American Indian antiques, but there are many important and far-reaching exceptions, especially amongst the Navajo and Zuni.

The early establishment of highly developed trading networks between the Indians of the Southwest and the Anglos (and Spanish, in earlier times) meant that Navajo and Pueblo crafts were trade items from a very early date. In fact, items such as Navajo blankets were highly prized trade items among other Indian groups as far back as the 1820s, and a good blanket could bring its owner a fine group of horses from a Sioux chief.With the coming of the Americans and the establishment of the trading post system in the 1860s and 1870s, the main customers became the art collectors of the East and demand for Indian “curios” has remained high to the present day.

The line between items made for use and items made for sale was never a clear one, because the Indians were often willing to trade or sell personal items. Many years of exposure to Anglos and the market economy had given them a keen sense of the value of items—quite different from the early situation in places such as sub-Saharan Africa and New Guinea. This extended to jewelry and items of personal adornment, which were available for sale in trading posts pretty much as soon as the posts opened their doors. For that reason, it can be said that almost all of the 19^th Century jewelry that made it to market was made for personal use, and ended up on the market as a result of happenstance.

In the 20^th Century, Indian crafts developed into an occupation for certain people. John Adair’s book is filled with tables illustrating the growth of silversmithing as a full-time occupation among the Navajo and Pueblo Indians, and a similar trend can be traced in other crafts such as pottery and weaving. These artisans would make pieces specifically to be sold, but would also make pieces for personal and family use. The pieces for sale tend to be a bit less elaborate than the personal pieces, but both are generally of good quality. The advent of “Fred Harvey” jewelry, which was light and of poor quality, widened the gulf between the two classes, though fine pieces continued to be made for sale.

In later days, the situation was reversed. The finest work done by the great Zuni inlay masters were almost entirely done for sale, as were most of the masterpieces from Kenneth Begay, Joe Quintana and the other great silversmiths of the mid-20^th Century. Up to the present day, the art market has been the final home for the vast majority of great jewelry made in the Southwest. Southwest Indian crafts, especially jewelry making, became a collectible art form very early in its history. Because of that, the “made for sale” distinction is not the kiss of death it is in other ethnographic art areas.

When a hallmark isn't enough...

2010-01-25T13:33:00.002-07:00

Beauty in art is subjective. What appeals to one person might be repulsive to another. This is as true in antique American Indian art as in any other type of art, and doubly true in jewelry. Many collectors adore the turquoise and coral nugget pieces of Dan Simplicio, while an equal number think them garish and awkward. Collectors of older Navajo pieces wish that older Zuni pieces had heavier silverwork, while the Zuni devotees search in vain for older Navajo pieces with fine lapidary work. Beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder, which is why many collectors find themselves reaching for something tangible as a sign of quality. Which brings us to the hallmark.

The first artist's hallmark on a piece of American Indian jewelry probably dates to 1925, when Juan DiDeos hallmarked a belt buckle now in the C. G. Wallace collection at the Heard Museum. Before then, all jewelry was made anonymously unless a patron or buyer took note of the artist. The idea of art as an individual exercise was not part of the extremely community-minded Indian culture, and as late as the 1960s many major jewelers had to be told to hallmark their pieces. People like Leekya, Leo Poblano and Charlie Houck never did use a hallmark, though contemporaries such as Dideos, Morris Robinson, Frank Vacit and Ambrose Roanhorse hallmarked many (though not all) of their pieces. In many cases the artists with more exposure to Anglo culture and markets, such as Robinson (who lived in Phoenix), Roanhorse (who exhibited as far away as New York) and Fred Peshlakai (who had his own store in Los Angeles) were more likely to use a hallmark. Still, even for those three it was not universal--Peshlakai was known to hallmark pieces only when requested or when entering a piece into a show, and nearly identical pieces both with and without his hallmark can be found.

It is only natural that a collector would want to know everything possible about a piece before adding it to their collection, and nothing is more important than identifying an artist and a date. The hallmark takes out much of the guesswork, and is a wonderful tool because of that. But there is a danger in collecting by hallmark, which is that a hallmark is a guarantee of origin, not of quality. A piece with Kenneth Begay's KB can be assumed to be his work, and if it has the White Hogan shop mark as well it can be reasonably dated to the 1948-1962 period. Does that hallmark make the piece better than a White Hogan piece with no hallmark, or with the hallmark of one of the other artists who worked there? Certainly not. Begay was such a fine smith that his pieces are likely to be of the highest quality, but there is no reason why an unsigned piece cannot be equally good, or maybe even better (unlikely, but possible).

Hallmarked pieces will always be very popular because much of the guesswork in owning them has been removed; a collector can match technical aspects to the maker through the hallmark, rather than having to work in a vacuum. But a hallmark on an inferior piece means one of two things: either the artist didn't do his best work, or the artist didn't actually make that particular item. Either way, collecting a bad piece with a hallmark is the wrong way to go. For a hallmark to matter, the name must match the quality. And a masterpiece with no hallmark is always better than a hallmark with no masterpiece.

Things to look for in old American Indian silver jewelry

2009-04-01T14:35:00.002-07:00

Here is a short list of technical and stylistic things to be aware of when looking at old (or not so old) American Indian silver jewelry.

1. Materials
There were a limited number of stones (almost entirely turquoise, with some jet and shell) available to craftsmen of the 19th and early 20th Centuries, and the metals used were silver (overwhelmingly), copper (rarely), and brass (very rarely). As additional turquoise mines were opened in the 1930s and more coral was imported, the variety of materials increased. Gold was only used very rarely until recent times, and exotic gems and minerals are a very recent innovation.

2. Techniques
The earliest pieces were made by simply heating and hammering silver wires or coins; more sophisticated and later pieces used techniques like annealing, casting and finally inlay. Early pieces will usually show annealing marks and stress cracks on the unfinished back side or inside. Inlay pieces should be cleanly and skillfully done, because the early inlay artists were not working in mass quantities as in later times. Overlay was developed at Hopi in 1946, and the vast majority of Hopi overlay pieces postdate 1960.

3. Bezels
Bezels are the silver strips used to affix stones to silverwork, and have changed greatly over the years. Early bezels were folded over the stones, and notched to prevent wrinkling. Some “sawtooth” bezels were made with many small notches, especially in the 1900-1920 time period. As a general rule, the thinner and more even bezels indicate a later date of manufacture.

4. Designs
Designs were limited by the tools available. The earliest designs were done with files and chisels, with very simple stamped elements. Later stamped designs were more elaborate and intricate, and covered more of the silver surface than in earlier pieces. “Indian” designs like the teepee and dog were characteristic of tourist trade pieces from the 1930s and 1940s.

5. Wear patterns
With very rare exceptions, old silver jewelry will show characteristic wear patterns from contact with skin, cloth or other jewelry. Old pieces made from ingot silver will wear smooth from being handled, and later pieces made from sheet silver will not show such obvious wear and will retain sharper edges. (Sometimes, a piece collected early on that was never worn will not show these patterns—wear patterns should not be a rule unto themselves, but should be taken into account with all other factors.) The coloration of the turquoise is also a kind of wear, because over time, turquoise will often absorb the oils off the wearer’s skin and darken in color.

6. Provenance
Provenance is helpful in determining a date of manufacture, but only if the provenance is consistent with all the other factors. Provenance establishes the history of an object, and is strongest if there is matching documentary evidence (such as photographs or collection records).
7. Hallmarks
If it is hallmarked and/or has a “sterling” stamp, it is probably post-1950. There are rare exceptions, but that is a good rule of thumb.

8. Automatic Dating Clues
Certain styles were popular at certain times, mainly in the 1970s during the Indian jewelry craze. Bear claws, sea foam turquoise, attached old coins, applied silver leaves, massive turquoise settings, shadowbox settings and dime beads were all integrated into Indian silverwork during this time, but not before. Lapis and yellow pin shell appeared in Zuni inlay in the 1970s, but generally not before. There are exceptions to some of these rules, but they are unusual and notable.

9. Revivals and Fakes
A revival piece is a piece made in an earlier style, while a fake is a piece made to deceive a buyer. Revivals are acceptable and real, fakes are not. Most fakes are made to look crude and early, but true early Indian silver was made by careful craftsmen who had simple tools but lots of time; while early pieces may look simple, they are not crude or sloppy. Fakes are also often too thick, because people think early pieces are ingot silver and ingot pieces have to be thick. In reality, silver was a precious commodity and early smiths would use only as much as was necessary for the job.

10. Other factors
Family history is provenance, but stories can change over time. Since most pieces of Indian jewelry were made after 1970, that is when most “my grandmother bought this” stories really begin. A piece that is considered “old” may have been bought 35 years ago, which could mean it was new at the time and made in 1974.

To see examples of old pieces, please visit our shop in Scottsdale or our website at http://www.turkey-mountain.com.