Authentic kachina doll?

I found what I think is a kachina doll recently. It has condition issues, of course, inc the feet and a missing lower arm. It's 12 inches / 30cm tall.

Still, I'm curious as to your all's opinions about its authenticity--is it Hopi?-- and thoughts about its age.

By the way I don't plan to sell it, but am curious for my own understanding.

Thanks in advance!

 

looks like cotton wood
feet likely glued to a base, making it a carving for sale..
some age....maybe 60's...or 70's...
maybe Navajo....

let's see what others have to say.....

 

It's light like cottonwood too (ie, not heavy).

 

on a personal note....
it reminds me of one I had long ago.....but I think yours is older and it's not from the same hand....still...similar in design....

 

Definitely some similarities. One of those Mark Sublette videos said the arms / hands extended from the body was a more recent development, and close to the body, as your former one here, was in general indicative of age.

Of course I imagine a carver can put the arms wherever he chooses!

 

There are hundreds of authentic kachinas, plus slight variations found in the three mesas of Hopi, so that allows for some differences. This kachina doll shows characteristics most closely resembling Rugan, (a corn kachina, or corn dancer) but doesn't match any of the 5 variations in the way the face is painted, or in the body paint, nor should he be wearing a cape.

I would therefore think that it was not carved by a Hopi, and therefore not an authentic kachina doll. It could been carved by a Navajo, or it could have been carved by a hobby carver, since both make items strictly for sale, and often make no attempt to portray the figure accurately. There are numerous books available that describe how to carve "kachina dolls," and every woodcarvers group probably has someone who makes similar things.

 

Indeed. I wondered too about the color of the paint, esp the blue, which looks less turquoise and more electric. Perhaps another factor in authenticity.

My education continues!

 

There are important elements missing - what was in his hands, his ears are gone - which makes it more difficult to identify him. But he has many of the features of "Talavai", Morning Singer. The green ruff, one blue leg & one yellow, yellow & blue bands on the shoulders, the cape, the feather headdress (in the case of yours, with real feathers). It looks like yours might have similar symbols painted on his face, hidden by the ruff.


https://www.kachinahouse.com/antiqu...arved-morning-singer-dancer-katsina-doll-0641

https://www.morningsinger.com/


https://www.adobegallery.com/art/hopi-talavai-morning-katsina-doll-circa-1940s


http://www.artnet.com/artists/joni-falk/talavai-morning-kachina-hopi-3qtnO0sXXhC8-52Lp9F0EA2

As for the intense shade of blue, technical studies have shown that Reckitts Laundry Blue, (introduced in the 1850s and still made) has been used on Hopi kachinas (as well as in other ethnographic contexts). The laundry bluing makes use of a synthetic ultramarine pigment.
N.Odegaard, M. Crawford, "Laundry Bluing as a Colorant in Ethnographic Objects: ICOM Preprints 11th triennial meeting, Vol II, Edinburgh, 1996

 

Wow. That looks spot-on similar.

You're correct in that the face markings match too. As do the fur hanging from the belt in the rear (fox?) and the sash.

Your detective work amazes me. Thank you!

 

The additional photos helped. (Seeing them now on the computer screen, instead of on the phone, also makes a difference!) I didn't realize before that the ruff was hiding important marking on his cheeks. Perhaps that is one reason that about half the time Talavai is depicted without the green ruff.

The pheasant feathers now seem an added attempt to hide the fact that he is missing his red tab ears. In the 1980s most Hopi carvers started carving feathers, when U.S. laws prohibited using most wild bird feathers. Now the use of pheasant feathers (along with rabbit fur, and lots of leather), is pretty much a sign of a Navajo carving, rather than an authentic Hopi kachina. So, if this is an earlier (mid-20th century) Hopi kachina doll, which it appears to be, the feathers were probably added by a former owner rather than by the maker.

I'd agree, with the additional information, it does appear to be Talavai, but missing some important pieces, and with some ill-advised attempts to make him look a little better.

Today he appears primarily during the Powamu, or Bean Planting dances which are held in late January/early February, so it's very appropriate that he shows up here, at this time!

 

agreed, the pheasant feathers are telling.......

 

An interesting coincidence!

It's a little early in this part of the world, but we might just have to plant some beans...

 

There have been unfortunate side effects of restrictions on feathers. Some people have modified ethnographic objects to make them sellable by removing and discarding feathers that are now illegal. Perhaps this is what happened to your kachina.

 

And that's interesting about the feathers. Another great insight deduced from the evidence!

I wonder, did federal laws banning wild bird feathers make any allowance for indigenous peoples using them for religious / traditional purposes?

(Recognizing that that probably would not include items intended for sale.)

 

Yes. Native Americans are allowed to acquire and possess eagle feathers for specific religious purposes, with special permits. But they cannot be sold.

https://www.fws.gov/eaglerepository/factsheets/PossessionOfEagleFeathersFactSheet.pdf

 

Sounds like a fun bureaucracy to navigate!

 

Thanks for all the help!!

 

Thanks for bringing a nice item to our attention !!