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.

  

  

The Arctic Worlds of Denise Wallace

One of the most creative and collectible Native artists that TMT carries is Denise Wallace, a Chugach Aleut woman who, by herself and in collaboration with her late husband Samuel, has created some of the most amazing jewelry of the modern era.  Her work always tells a story, with each piece titled and representing a facet of Alaskan Native culture.  Many of those reading this will be familiar with her work, but for those who are not, this blog entry will be a visual treat.

Sea Otter pin/pendant,1990, #14/20 (face is closed)

(face is open)

Wallace works mostly in silver, though gold accents are not uncommon.  She is known for using fossil ivory inlays, which as a member of an indigenous Alaskan group she can do legally.  One of the trademarks of her work is masks that open to reveal something underneath, usually a face.

Woman in Moon pin/pendant, 1988 (closed)

(open)

All of the designs are all Denise's, and up until Samuel's death in 2010, much of the fabrication was done him, an extremely talented craftsman.  Since that time, Denise has continued on creating and fabricating her own designs.  Since Samuel was not Native American, for years Denise was not allowed to exhibit at Indian Market, but she currently is an active participant and prizewinner. 

Seal Hunt ring, 1990

Most of the pieces Denise has made are multiples, with the sea otter above being number 14 of an edition of 20.  Smaller pieces such as the Woman in the Moon and Seal Hunt pieces above are larger editions, and not individually marked as such.  

Dancer Bracelet, 3/3, 1990 (closed)

(open)

More major pieces, like the Dancer bracelet above, are done in smaller editions (in this case, only 3).  This bracelet shows Wallace's use of different stones, in this case lapis, alongside the familiar fossil ivory.  

Fish earrings, undated

For those on a slightly more limited budget, Wallace also has created what she calls Gallery Line pieces, which are cast pieces with hand-executed elements added on, like the carving on the fish earrings above.  Most were done in Santa Fe between 1992 and 1997, after which the Gallery Line was discontinued.

Of her work, Denise has said, "My main goal is, through my work, to express Alaska Native culture."  

A very comprehensive book on Wallace's career was written and published by Lois Sherr Dubin in 2005, and shows many other great examples of her work.  It is called ARCTIC TRANSFORMATIONS: THE JEWELRY OF DENISE & SAMUEL WALLACE, and is available on Amazon.

All the pieces illustrated here are available for purchase--for more information, contact us at (480) 423-8777. 

 

Lots of Leekya

For many people, Leekya Deyuse (commonly known as Leekya) is the first, last and only word in historic Zuni fetish carving.  Many contemporary carvers exhibit amazing artistry and technical proficiency, but it cannot be denied that Leekya took the Zuni art of stonecarving to a place it had never seen before, turning it from a craft into a true art form.  By the time he died in 1966, his work was universally acknowledged as the finest and most distinct ever made at the Pueblo.  Today, collectors and museums actively seek out his work, which is both rare and valuable.

There was a real paucity of information in the literature about him until 2018, when in conjunction with a show at the Albuquerque Museum, Deb Slaney published her book LEEKYA: MASTER CARVER OF ZUNI PUEBLO.  It is the finest work done to date on him (and some of his compatriots and descendants) and is a must-have for anyone serious about Southwest Indian arts.  (To obtain a copy of the book, contact the Albuquerque Museum directly.)  In celebration of the book and the artist, we are pleased to show some of his carvings, and even more pleased to share some of our knowledge about the man and his art.  (All of the items pictured are from our Turkey Mountain Traders inventory and are available for purchase.  Please contact us for more details 480-423-8777.)

First off, his career as a carver started in the mid-1920s.  The necklace below is listed in the C. G. Wallace Collection catalog as lot #1015, carved in 1928.  It is hardly the work of a newcomer to the art, as you can see.

The form most commonly associated with Leekya is the bear, and he had a very specific way of carving the ears that differentiates his work from imitators.  In the words of Deb Slaney, "Tom and Deborah Begner of Turkey Mountain Traders noticed in the 1990s that Leekya's bears' right ears were often carved vertically while the left ears were angled, suggesting a patter to Leekya's carving method; that is, which hand holds the animal and which hand carves the details."  This observation was confirmed by Leekya's son Freddie.  Since the world is full of bears that kind of look like Leekya pieces, it is an excellent way to tell a fake from the real article.

His animals often have smiling heads tilted to one side, because he thought that smiling animals would sell better.  These small bears have slight smiles and heads cocked slightly to the side.  The white bear is exactly 1 inch long and the turquoise bear is 3/4" long--quite small for standalone Leekya carvings.

And here is another bear, this one carved in profile and set into a silver ring.  Talk about charming--the smile on this one is easily seen.

Leekya's favorite carving material, even more than turquoise, was Zuni rock, a tan-brown type of mudstone.  We don't have any of those pieces in inventory right now, unfortunately, but we have this marvelous horse carved from red abalone shell.  Note how it is carved to highlight the red on one side only.

Often, when he was carving something to be set in silver, either in jewelry or on a flat surface like a box lid, he would incorporate a pedestal base so that the carving could be more easily set.  Here are two bracelets with turquoise frogs that show this type of carving and setting (he was not a silversmith, and someone else always did the settings.)

And here is an example where he carved a very large fetish (a "bearskin rug" carving, one of two known) which was then set on a large silver box.  This carving was purportedly done in 1955, which is considered to be one of his most creative periods.

Again, in this carving he takes great advantage of the natural shading of the red abalone.  The other known "bearskin rug", which is smaller, is in the Heard Museum and pictured on page 46 of Slaney's Leekya book referenced above.

Most of Leekya's carvings were made completely by hand, though later in life he did use an electric grinder.  

If you have any questions about Leekya or any of the pieces you see here, please let us know.  And by all means, make sure you have a copy of Deb Slaney's book in your library.