The Prodigal Plates Return!

 Sometimes, the objects we handle have a personal connection to us that makes them extra-special.  Here is the story of something just like that:

There are four silver plates by Ike Wilson, each exactly alike.  Here is a closer photo of one of them:

You can see the large size of each plate--just over 5 3/4" in diameter.  (The dollar bill is just for scale, and not included with the plates.)  Condition is wonderful--any smudges or blemishes on the inside are a figment of the photo, and do not exist in real life.  Here is a detail shot of the incredible stampwork:

The spacing on the stampwork is perfect, and the composition is incredible.  Here is a picture of the bottom:

The four dishes nest together very well.  And here is the hallmark:

Each plate is hallmarked with a bow and arrow, and this is where it gets really interesting.  That is the hallmark for Ike Wilson, a great Navajo silversmith who was accidentally shot to death by his wife Katherine in 1942.  After Ike's death, Katherine continued to use his stamps and hallmark until the 1980s, so many pieces that have been attributed to Ike were really done by Katherine.  However, since these plates were collected before 1938, this is definitely Ike's work.  (Thanks to Kim and Pat Messier for their research on Ike and Katherine Wilson, published in their 2014 book REASSESSING HALLMARKS OF NATIVE SOUTHWEST JEWELRY.  It is a must-have for any serious collector of Southwest Indian silverwork.)

And the story behind these plates?  Here it is:

It was the summer of 1993, and I (Steve) was working for the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center in Cortez, Colorado.  My job was in the Field Seminars department, which was a very fancy way of saying I was a tour bus driver and tour arranger.  We would take groups around the Southwest to important and interesting cultural and archaeological places (I long ago lost count of how many times I've been to Chaco Canyon), all in the comfort of 15-person Ford vans with luggage racks on top.  Among other things, I got to know where every gas station bathroom in the Four Corners area was located.  But seriously, it was a great experience.

Most people would fly into the Durango airport, and the trips would begin from Cortez.  Lost or delayed luggage was a pretty frequent problem, and often one of the Field Seminars drivers who was not part of a trip would be called upon to shuttle a late bag to wherever the person happened to be.  In this case, it was at Hopi, a five-hour drive from Durango.  Needless to say, I was pretty waxed when I got to the Hopi Cultural Center and delivered the bag, so I was going to stay overnight there and have dinner with the group.  After eating, they were supposed to hear a presentation from the Hopi Cultural Preservation Officer, but half an hour after it was supposed to begin, he had not shown up.  To kill some time, I offered to do a short talk on the trading post system on the Navajo and Hopi reservations, which eventually turned into a two-hour question and answer session.  (No, he never did show up.)

Afterwards, a very nice older woman came up to me and said she had enjoyed the talk very much, and also that she liked the bracelet I was wearing.  She mentioned that a relative of hers had collected a number of "chief's bracelets" like that, as well as other pieces, and she was looking to sell them. She said she would call when she got back to Pennsylvania, and we went our separate ways.  I went off to bed, and the next day back to Cortez.

Turns out, this relative had spent every summer in the 1920s and 1930s in Estes Park, Colorado, and had bought quite a bit of very nice Indian silver.  She stopped going out West in 1938, so everything dated to before that.  A lot of great pieces, with great provenance, all totally fresh to the market.  Included in that were some tableware items, including some silver plates.  Believe me, it didn't take long to sell every last piece.

Fast forward to last month, I came upon a listing that looked interesting, for 4 Ike Wilson silver plates.  When I looked closer, I saw that the provenance listed a 1994 sales slip from Turkey Mountain Traders, saying that they had been bought in Colorado before 1938.  Here were the prodigal (not in a bad way) plates, just waiting for us to bring them home.  So, we did, and here they are: 

So, you have a set of four important masterpieces with a renowned known maker and solid provenance, and a cute backstory to boot.  The price for the four plates is $4200.  Please call 480-423-8777 with any questions or email us at info@turkey-mountain.com.  

Pump-Drilled and Electric-Drilled: Small Differences Make a Big Difference

The first "Indian" jewelry was made from shell and stone beads strung on a type of cordage; examples of beads made from turquoise and shell have been excavated from ruins in Chaco Canyon.  To this day, shell and turquoise bead and tab necklaces are an important part of any collection of Southwest Indian jewelry and are considered the most "Indian" of all Indian jewelry.  There are still a few artists who hand-roll their shell and stone beads, and pieces by practitioners of this art such as Cheryl Yestewa, Piki Wadsworth, Ray Lovato and the Reanos are avidly collected by the cognoscenti.  

In terms of telling the difference between older shell and turquoise necklaces and newer ones, it can be a difficult task.  The cordage used can be helpful, but often necklaces break and the original cordage is replaced by something more modern (and stronger).  The type of turquoise used can sometimes be an indicator of age, but often the turquoise is a plain green or blue, without any defining matrix to determine what mine it is from or even how old it might be.  What is left?  One major factor remaining is the method of drilling the holes in the beads, which can be very diagnostic indeed.

Shown above are two shell and turquoise necklaces.  The one on the left dates to 1940-1960, while the one on the right is considerably older, likely 1900-1920.  The reason we can say that is that the beads and tabs of the left necklace were drilled with an electric drill, while the beads and tabs of the right necklace show all the signs of being drilled with a pump drill.

Before the Pueblos were electrified sometime in the period between 1945 and 1960, the only method beadmakers had to drill holes into their beads was the pump drill.  One is shown above without the sharpened bit that would be attached to the bottom.  The stick in the middle is pushed up and down and slides along the shaft, creating a back-and-forth spin of the sharpened bit that (eventually) creates a drilled hole.  It is tedious work, because the bit does not rotate quickly enough to do much drilling work on every pump, but as they say, it beats the alternative.

If you look at the piece of turquoise above, which is from the right-hand necklace, so can see the results of a pump drill at work.  The hole produced is conical, and normally quite a bit larger at the top than the bottom.  Also, since a pump driller would drill on one side until it pierced the other and then turn over the bead to be drilled from the other side, the overall profile of the hole is that of an hourglass, with one side deeper than the other.  Contrast that with the hole in the piece of turquoise below:

This turquoise is from the newer necklace, and you can see the hole is quite a bit smaller and more regular.  It was drilled electrically, with something similar to a dental drill.  The high speed of the electric drill creates a cylindrical hole with a nearly even profile and enables the beadmaker to make many more beads with far less breakage and effort.

Whether pump-drilled or electrically drilled, making beads is an art form to be admired.  But pump-drilled pieces are old and quite rare, and command far higher prices than their equally beautiful electrically drilled cousins.

For information on either of the necklaces pictures here, or with any questions, feel free to email us or give us a call at (480) 423-8777.

Happy New Year!

  

Monongya's Mastery, In One Piece

 The list of true contemporary masters in Southwest Indian silverwork is short, but any such list surely must include the name of Jesse Monongya.  Through his long and productive career, he has continually pushed the boundaries of "Indian" jewelry, both technically and in his choice of materials.  His mastery of mosaic inlay is superb, and he almost singlehandedly popularized the use of materials such as opal.  We would like to celebrate him and his jewelry by looking closely at a piece that demonstrates what is great and unique about his work--this 14k gold and inlay belt buckle.

The buckle is one of his "night sky" pieces, although different from many in that the background is blue rather than black.  Many artists have followed his lead in making "night sky" pieces, but he was the original, and his work is of exceedingly high quality.  He also used the finest materials, such as natural opal, high grade coral and natural lapis.  His use of dot inlay is not groundbreaking (Leo Poblano and Teddy Weahkee were doing it as far back as the 1930s), but the way he sometimes uses a ring of gold or silver around a colored dot is his innovation (note the red dot in the top right hand corner of the buckle with a gold ring around it.)  And, in fact, three of the red dots are actually high-quality Burmese rubies that fluoresce under UV light. 

One thing about this buckle that is different from much of his earlier work is his use of diamonds along the edges.  And not just tiny melee diamonds, either--each diamond is approximately 3/16 of a carat, so there is a total of approximately 1.5 carats of diamond in the buckle.  As is proper when setting diamonds, he left the back open to let more light through to highlight the sparkle of the stones.

What is truly unique about this buckle, though, is what is on the back:

Totally unexpected, and quite wonderful.  Note the great attention to detail, including the coral tips to the antennae of the butterfly.  Kind of an homage to Loloma and his "inner beauty" pieces with the inlay on the inside, where only the wearer knows it is there.  His hallmark is directly above the butterfly, and his last name is spelled with an A on the end, as he did in later pieces.  (We currently have a necklace he did in 1985 where it is spelled with an E on the end.)

The buckle measures 2 3/4" x 1 5/8", takes up to a 1" leather, and weighs 77 grams.  It is currently available for purchase--for more information, email us or call at (480) 423-8777.

   

Dealer Lingo: The Slang We Use

Every business has its own vernacular language, and the antique Indian art business is no different.  We as dealers sometimes assume that what we say is understandable to everyone, when in fact a little dictionary would sometimes be quite helpful.  So, as a public service, here is a listing of terms that we in the biz use that you may run into sometimes, and their real-world definitions:

Tranny--definitely not what it means in the bigger world.  A transitional blanket, woven by a Navajo weaver between 1880 and 1905.  Made from handspun wools, often in an eye-dazzler pattern.

Stoplight ring--a Navajo ring with three round turquoise, set vertically like in a stoplight.

Salt and pepper beadwork--beadwork done with a random pattern of colors, rather than in a specific pattern.

Diamond slot First Phase--an early Navajo concho belt, with a diamond shaped opening with a central bar so that the leather can be threaded through the concho.  These were made before soldering was a common practice amongst the Navajo, because after that, loops were soldered on to the back of conchos to hold the leather.

Height bracelet or ring--a bracelet or ring with stones set in differing heights.  This was a specialty of Charles Loloma, who invented the technique and used it to represent mesas and landscapes.  Not a common technique, but when done well it is very striking and beautiful.

Fishscale inlay--a Zuni technique of channel inlay where the stones are set in small, curved pieces.  The resulting effect is very much like a fishscale pattern.

Sawtooth bezel--a silver bezel with hand-cut serrations resembling the teeth of a saw blade.  Normally found in early (pre-1930) Navajo silverwork.

Heavy Harvey jewelry--tourist-trade oriented jewelry that is heavier than the usual very thin, badly made jewelry that was sold to tourists before 1940.  Unlike much tourist trade jewelry, Heavy Harvey pieces are hand-made, and often incorporate good turquoise.

Windowpane earrings--early (usually) earrings where a turquoise tab is edge-wrapped in silver to produce a windowpane effect on both sides. 

Blank--a commercially made casting mold, often used in lower-end jewelry to produce cast pieces.  Pieces made from blanks will be even and precise and will show up multiple times.  Pieces from hand-carved casting molds will show the slight imperfections of all hand-made things and will often be totally unique.

Shiprock Yei--a Navajo weaving with a white background, incorporating Yei holy figures and often cornplants.  Most were woven in the Four Corners region, an area dominated by Shiprock.

Crow pink--a shade of pink beads that was especially favored in the work of the Crow people.

Cutter--a Navajo weaving that is so damaged that its only use is to be cut up and used for pillows or in jacket inserts.

Resto--short for restoration.

Beader--a piece of beadwork that is damaged beyond repair and is normally used as a "bead mine" to fix other pieces.

Whitehearts--early red beads with a white center.

Dance bead--a bead, usually turquoise, that has been attached to a necklace to show that it has been worn in a dance or ceremony.

Burn--as in, "to burn a piece".  That is, to expose a piece to the market at an unrealistic high price.  A pet peeve of reputable dealers.

That is all for now, but we will rack our brains searching for other entries.  If you know of any that we have neglected, please let us know!

Who did it better?

One of the fun things about contemporary silversmithing is looking at similar pieces made by different artists and comparing what they did and how they did it.  And if the two artists being compared are two of the all-time greats, it's even more fun!  Recently, we acquired two pieces that are incredibly similar in scale, materials and form, and thought it would be interesting and instructive to compare and contrast them.  So, without further ado....

Here are two silver and coral belt buckles.  The one on the left was made and hallmarked by Lee Yazzie, while the one on the right was made and hallmarked by Julian Lovato.  As you can see, they are nearly the same size, and the coral cabochons are nearly the same size as well.  But they are quite different in construction and execution.  Let's look at each one to see how they differ.

The Lovato buckle is 3 3/16" wide and 1 7/8" high and weighs 108 grams--a nice heavy weight for a buckle.  It is made in overlay style, with a cutout silver plate soldered to a larger silver plate beneath.  What gives it its nice weight is the two high-gauge silver plates used in the construction.  The bezel is Lovato's typically architectural fluted bezel, which can be seen in the bottom photo.

Yazzie's buckle is 3 1/4" x 2" and weighs 54 grams--it is easy to see how the single silver plate construction of this buckle would be half the weight of Lovato's.  Instead of the geometric overlay that Lovato used, Yazzie used texturing on one half of the buckle to create a very visually pleasing and interesting piece.  Yazzie's bezel is also scored, as can be seen in the bottom photo, but not nearly to the extent of Lovato's.  Yazzie's buckle is also quite a bit more domed that Lovato's, which is essentially flat.

We have talked about the difference in the two, but in many ways, they are incredibly similar.  The coral cabs are about the same size and quality, and both used commercial belt holders and handmade tongues.  Lovato stamped his STERLING, as was his style, while Yazzie did not, though it is clearly sterling.

Which buckle is better?  That is impossible to say and depends entirely on the tastes of the viewer.  Both are extraordinary examples of Southwest Indian silverwork, exemplary in design, execution and materials.  Both are currently available from Turkey Mountain Traders--call us at (480) 423-8777 or email us at info@turkey-mountain.com for more information on either one.

 

Things that look like things in books

Anyone who has seen our library of Native American Art books knows that we practice what we preach in that regard; it is not easy to find a book on the subject that is not represented.  And since art books tend to have lots of pictures, it is not uncommon for us to find a piece in our inventory in one of them, or else something very close to it.  Sometimes it is a known fact, while other times it comes as a pleasant surprise, but either way, it is always nice to know that someone thought enough of a piece similar to (or identical to) yours to include it in a book, immortalized for eternity.  And occasionally, the book will teach you something about the piece that you did not previously know, which is the best of all worlds.

(A bit of terminology here--calling something a "book piece" means that that exact piece was published in a book.  That is different from having a piece that is very similar to a piece in a book.)

A necklace that meets all the criteria as a book piece is this one pictured below:

It is pictured as lot #1015 on page 169 of the C. G. Wallace Auction Catalog of 1975, which places it in time at that point.  Additionally, it is dated to 1928 in the book, and attributed to Leekya Deyuse by the man who originally collected it.  The best book pieces have this kind of ironclad provenance, which is one reason why they always command a premium on the open market.

Now, what about similar pieces?  That is, pieces that are similar to book pieces, but not the same?  There is still a lot to be learned from comparing similar pieces.  Sometimes, you can even make an attribution, though that can be dangerous if you have not seen the book piece in person.  Take this bracelet:

A very unusual bracelet, with silver balls surrounding turquoise that is set in sawtooth bezels.  Now, look at this book piece from WATER WIND BREATH, the new book on the Southwest American Indian collection at the Barnes Foundation in Philadelphia:

At first glance, they look to have been made by the same hand.  Serrated bezels, silver drops surrounding the stones, and what appears to be wirework in the background.  But on closer examination, the Barnes Foundation bracelet is a solid piece of silver, with filework done to resemble wirework.  Also, the turquoise and silver balls in the book piece are set directly on the bracelet, while our bracelet has the stones and silver balls set on plates that are then attached to the bracelet.  Small differences, but important ones.  Can it be said that the two were made by the same maker?  It is possible, but it can't be said without a shadow of a doubt.

And then, there are pieces that pass the test.  Here is a fantastic silver bracelet:

And here is a picture from the book LOLOMA:

Not hard to say that all three pieces are by the same hand, certainly.  And in fact, they are all hallmarked by the maker, Charles Loloma, so we already knew that.  What we can learn from the book is that these bracelets were the first ones he did in the Kachina Face pattern, which was one of his greatest artistic expressions in jewelry.  That was in 1981, so the huge similarities make it possible for us to date our Loloma Kachina Face bracelet with a great degree of accuracy.  All because it is similar to a book piece.

The Leekya necklace and the two bracelets mentioned here are all available for purchase.  If you have any questions about any of them, please feel free to email or call us at 480-423-8777.

  

A comparison of two great old bracelets

One of the hardest things to do with antique Indian jewelry, as with all antiques, is to establish fair value.  Big things make a big difference, certainly (age, condition, provenance, overall quality) but little things can also make a big difference.  What separates a more expensive piece from its less expensive cousin, when most of the factors are equivalent or nearly so?  To answer this question in one small example, let's look at two bracelets in Turkey Mountain's current inventory.

On the left is B 3267, and on the right is B 3297.  Both are Navajo silver bracelets, and both predate 1915.  Condition on both is excellent, and many of the construction details are similar.  B 3267 has an inside size of 5 3/4", while B 3297 has an inside size of 5 5/8".  Yet B 3267 is priced at $4900, while B 3297 is at $3600.  Why the difference?

The first two reasons are obvious.  3267 on the left is wider and larger scale, with more silver.  It weighs 49 grams, while the other weighs 40 grams.  Also, 3267 has a turquoise set in the middle, and bracelets with turquoise will normally sell for more than similar ones without.  Those are the factors that anyone can see.  Now, let's look at some factors that are not so obvious.

On the sides, B 3267 has repoussed and filed diamonds, while the diamonds on the sides of B 3297 are merely stamped.  Repousse is a very difficult and technically demanding technique, so pieces that show repousse command a premium.  However, B 3297 is not totally defenseless--it has repoussed terminals, and any kind of interesting terminal treatment, be it repousse or set stones, makes a piece quite desirable.  So, both pieces show very fine and interesting repousse work, though in different places.

And now we see more repousse, this time in the center of the bracelet.  Both bracelets have it--on B 3267 on the left, the repousse is beneath the turquoise, while there is no turquoise on the repousse on B 3297 on the right.  However, if you look closely, you will notice that the inside of the repousse on both bracelets is smooth, while the outside shows either concentric diamonds (on the left) or fluting (on the right).  This means that the artist in both cases filed the outside of the repousse to create texture and design.  Since the filework was only done on the outside, the inside remains smooth.  A very difficult and demanding way to decorate silver, and both bracelets have it.

The stampwork on B 3297 on the right is a bit more finely done than that of B 3267 on the left, including all those wonderfully executed arrows.  This means that B 3297 is likely just a touch younger than B 3267--not much, maybe 5 or 10 years.

One last factor is provenance.  B 3267 has been in two very important collections in its lifetime--the Laura Anderson and Phil Bacon collections.  B 3297 is still waiting to be a part of an important collection, which it certainly deserves.  

So, to conclude, B 3267 on the left is wider, heavier, older, and has turquoise and better provenance.  B 3297 on the right is more finely done, and still shows great age and wear.  The extra age on B 3267 is what mostly accounts for the price difference, but being narrower, B 3297 might be easier for everyday wear.  Also, the terminal repousses on B 3297 are absolutely fantastic.  In the end, the main deciding factor should be which bracelet appeals more to you.  They are both fantastic pieces worthy of being in any collection.

For more information on these pieces, or any others in our inventory, email us or call 480-423-8777.