Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Taupou, post: 3698967, member: 45&quot;]My first thought was, also, that it appeared to be Navajo, based on the size alone.&nbsp; The large size is usually associated with Navajo carvings, rather than Hopi kachina dolls.&nbsp; For a brief time in the mid-1960s, over-sized pieces were carved, but the practice was quickly changed, when it was found they didn&#039;t sell as well as smaller kachina dolls.</p><p><br /></p><p>For what it&#039;s worth, &quot;J. Creek&quot; is evidently not &quot;renowned&quot; enough to be included in Gregory Schaaf&#039;s <u>Hopi Katsina, 1600 Artist Biographies</u>. Considering that the size of the Hopi tribe is a fraction of that of the Navajo, and that Gregory Schaaf is a respected author and researcher, I would expect an entry, since pretty much every Hopi kachina doll carver, especially one who is described as renowned, would be included.</p><p><br /></p><p>I would also doubt that is a correct date, since this type of base or stand wasn&#039;t made at that time, at least by the Hopi. In the 1970s, a simple slice of cottonwood root was the standard mount, if there was one. </p><p><br /></p><p>It also is problematic in that it should be painted with white leggings and shirt, if it is meant to be a White Ogre.&nbsp; He doesn&#039;t resemble any of the Ogres, though, in that he doesn&#039;t have characteristic blue arm bands.&nbsp; Plus, none is known as simply a &quot;Long Snout Ogre,&quot; and it would be considered by many to be irreverent for a Hopi carver to identify it as such.</p><p><br /></p><p>So I would have to say that I doubt that this is an authentic Hopi kachina doll, despite the listings on line, unless someone can come up with more proof than simply their claim that it is.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in