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.

A Final Word on August Shows, and Another Reason to Come to Santa Fe

 Here we are in August, and our show schedule has been finalized.  There is no mask mandate in Santa Fe at the moment, and things are looking pretty good here.  So, here is the schedule:

Whitehawk Show:

OPENING NIGHT PREVIEW
Friday, August 13th
6pm – 9pm
Tickets $50.00 per person

THE SHOW
Saturday, Aug. 14th – Monday, Aug. 16th
10am – 5pm Daily
Tickets $15.00 per day or $25.00 for Run of Show

One thing that is different this year is that there is no dinner associated with the opening night preview, which is really too bad.  But still, it is a great opportunity to get a look at the show before the regular crowd arrives.  Turkey Mountain Traders will be in a new and bigger booth this year, directly to the left of the front door as you enter.  Our selection of jewelry, textiles and other surprises is as strong this year as it has ever been, so please check us out!

Native Treasures Show at the Eldorado Hotel:

Thursday, August 19th to Sunday, August 22nd, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

For those who have not been to this show, it is definitely a must-see.  And the price is right, since admittance is free!  The show is indoors and air-conditioned, which makes it a very pleasant place to be on some of those hot August days.  The show is slanted towards jewelry, though there are plenty of other works of art to be found there.  Our booth is in the back right-hand corner, the same place we were in 2019.

If you arrive in town before Whitehawk and would like a private showing, Turkey Mountain Traders is available for private appointments on the 10th and 11th at our townhouse, located a short drive from the Plaza.  Call us at (480) 423-8777 or (602) 819-5758 for your appointment.

ANOTHER REASON TO VISIT SANTA FE

For those of us who love old Native American silverwork, there is a great new exhibition at the Museum of Indian Arts and Culture (MIAC) on Museum Hill.  It is a collection of silverwork, mostly Navajo, that was purchased by former curator H. P. Mera on a trip through Indian Country in 1932.  Everything dates prior to 1932  (obviously) and it is fascinating to examine the various techniques and styles that were being used at the time.  For example, the amount of commercial silver for bezels that was available at the time was much greater than many people currently think, and Persian turquoise was also more heavily used in the 1920s than we thought.  All in all, some extraordinary pieces with fantastic provenance.  No catalog, unfortunately.  The show is well worth a special trip up the hill to MIAC when you are in town, both for the beauty of the pieces and the information they can offer.

The (current) word on our August shows

One of the big questions running around our part of the world lately has been, "What is going on with the August shows in Santa Fe?"  Now that it has been announced that Indian Market will be going ahead in a slightly reduced form on August 21-22, come clarity has been brought to the situation.  There are still questions to be answered, but here is what we know right now.  Nothing is set in stone, but the information we are giving here is at least set in Jell-O.

Turkey Mountain Traders (TMT) is currently scheduled to do two shows in Santa Fe in August.  The first is the Whitehawk Show at the Santa Fe Convention Center on August 13-16.  Many of you have been to this show, which is without question the finest antique Indian and Ethnographic art show in the world.  This year, TMT will be in a new and larger booth, right next to the front entrance.  We have been stockpiling material since March of 2020, so our collection should be among the best we have ever offered.  The second show is the Native Treasures show at the Eldorado Hotel, August 19-22.  Unlike the Whitehawk show, this show has not been confirmed yet, but it looks promising.  This is a very diverse show, with items ranging from irreplaceable treasures from the greatest living Indian artists to things that are far more affordable.  This show takes place on the Thursday and Friday before Indian Market, as well as the two days of Market, and is a must-see.  Works by many artists who do not exhibit at Indian Market can be found at this show, as well as vintage and antique pieces.  We will be in the same corner booth as we occupied in 2019, if you visited the show then.

What is really new and exciting for TMT is that we will be moving into a new private gallery space in Santa Fe, which will be available for private showings starting on August 8.  It is located fewer than 5 miles from the Santa Fe Plaza--an easy drive, with good parking.  If you would like an early look at our treasures in August before the shows open, give us a call and we would be happy to welcome you to our new gallery.

What we know about Indian Market is that it will be held on August 21 and 22 on the Santa Fe Plaza, and the number of booths will be limited to 500 (down from around 850).  The word is that there will be tickets for sale for entry, though how that will be handled is still up in the air.  The best source for immediate information is the SWAIA website.  (UPDATE: tickets for each day will be $40 for admission at 6 a.m. and $20 for admission at 8 a.m.  SWAIA will begin selling tickets to SWAIA members on May 28 and to the general public on May 29.)

If you have any questions about our Santa Fe schedule, please give us a call at (480) 423-8777, or drop us an email.

A very important piece in the history of Southwestern Indian silverwork

 The word "important" is used far too often in the art world in general, and the Southwestern Indian silverwork world in particular.  Importance is a very subjective concept, and what makes something "important" is very hard to define.  Is a piece "important" because it is early?  Or because someone who is now famous made it?  The answer to both may well be yes, but not necessarily.  Early pieces can be minor and unimportant, and not everything made by a famous artist can be considered a masterpiece.  How about if a piece is pictured in a book, or displayed in a major museum?  Again, maybe, but maybe not.

But what if something combines all of these things?  If that is the case, then calling it "important" is probably not a stretch.  It is not often that such a confluence of factors occurs, and it is notable indeed when something does indeed check all the boxes.  Something like that just happened in Turkey Mountain Traders' inventory, and we are excited and proud to tell everyone about it.

First, a bit of background.  One of the most common questions we are asked involves hallmarks, and when they came into use in the American Indian Southwest.  It is a known fact that, left to their own devices, early Indian silversmiths did not use hallmarks until the mid-1920s, and infrequently even then.  After much coaxing by traders and patrons, hallmarks came into more common use in the 1930s and 1940s, and today it is unusual for an Indian smith to not hallmark their work.  The absolute earliest that a hallmarked piece can be found with a solid date is 1925, and that piece is shown below:

It is a cast silver and turquoise belt buckle in the Heard Museum, formerly in the collection of C. G. Wallace.  The image is from BLUE GEM WHITE METAL by Deb Slaney, as is the passage below:

The buckle is the earliest hallmarked piece with solid provenance known to exist anywhere.  It was the beginning of the recognition of the Indian silversmith as a true artist, worthy of individual recognition by collectors, scholars and the art world in general.  Which is why it was so exciting for us when we found this: 

  

Very slightly different, but clearly by the same hand using the same techniques (casting and channel inlay) and done at the same time.  And how about a hallmark?

There it is, the mark of Juan DiDeos.  Hallmarked pieces by him are rare, as are inlaid pieces by him.  To find a piece with both a hallmark and inlay that can be dated so early is truly an amazing occurrence.  This is truly one of the most important pieces of silver we have ever offered for sale.

The turquoise is probably Blue Gem, and the buckle measures 2 1/2" x 2 1/8".  Weight 49 grams.  Takes up to a 3/4" leather.  SOLD

Resizing, converting and repairing--yay or nay?

 Recently, Diana and I were looking at a pair of earrings with an eye towards a possible purchase.  It was a very nice pair, an early Zuni pair with wonderful work and very nice old turquoise.  In fact, it looked a lot like this:

Very interesting and beautiful.  They are some of the best ones we have seen in some time, actually.  But there was a question about them, one that leads to a larger issue for those who love and collect antique American Indian silverwork.  Look at the back of them:

Notice that the original hook is still present, but they have clearly been modified.  The hook looks to have broken at some time in the not-so-recent past, and was then soldered on to the back of the earring and supplemented with a post and button.  So, not completely original, which is a bit of a shame.  It did not stop us from purchasing the pair, but should it stop a serious collector from adding them to their collection?  Does it seriously detract from the integrity of the piece?  And taking the wide view, which modifications are okay and which ones should be avoided at all costs?

As a disclaimer, please remember that these choices are all entirely personal, and others may not agree.  Some people will only purchase items that are completely original, not repaired or modified in any way.  (These people tend to have very small collections.) But as someone who has been through my share of rodeos, I can speak from long years of experience and say what the market in general is willing to accept.

In the case of this pair of earrings, a distinction needs to be made between the body of the earring and the findings.  The earring itself starts at the loop soldered on to the top, and everything below is integral to the original piece.  However, the finding to which the loop is attached, in this case a button and post, is not only not original but almost certainly not made by the original artist.  This is not at all unusual, in both contemporary and historic pieces--findings, such as earring posts or clips, bolo clips and pin backs, are often commercially made and added to the body of the piece as needed.  So, while this pair of earrings would have been enhanced if the original hooks were still functional, it is not much of a problem that the findings are not original.  

But what if the repair was a conversion, instead of a simple fix?  What if the pair had been split up and each one converted to a pendant?  That is a different story, and would be a problem for most collectors.  Strangely, though, the same does not always apply to pins and bolos, which have a long history of being converted.  With those, the question is where the original artist stopped--did he or she simply make something and then hand it over to a trader to make into whatever they thought would sell, which was the case with many old Zuni pieces?  If the artist was a noted inlayer, like Leo Poblano, he would almost never do the silverwork; he did not have the final say in what form his work would take, so a conversion does not go counter to his original wishes.  But if the work was that of a Navajo silversmith like Kenneth Begay, who would have attached his own finding, it should be kept the way it was originally made.  (This does not apply when considering clip earrings, which can be converted to posts or vice versa without any problem, as long as the conversion does not harm any hallmark.)  

What about resizing rings?  That is probably the most common type of modification we see in the business, but is it a problem?  The simple answer is no, with a caveat.  The resizing should be well-done, and should not harm any markings on the inside.  It also should not disrupt any pattern on the outside, which is where the problem arises on many contemporary rings.  

Repairs are the same as resizing--if it is well-done and does not affect the integrity of a piece from either a structural or design standpoint, then it is okay.  Granted an unrepaired piece in perfect condition is always preferable, but many of these items are a century old and have seen 100 years of wear.  It is unreasonable to expect perfection.  Instead, we should expect beauty.