Is this an authentic Kachina Doll?

Recently bought at an auction for 250$, wanted to know whether any experts can spot if it is actually authentic or not

 

Hello, Nicola! I've taken the liberty of reposting your photograph as Full Image so it's easier for everyone to see.

Debora

 

Thank you Debora!

 

Welcome, Nicola.
May we see views of all 4 sides of your kachina, as well as the feathers (they are cut off in the one photo provided)?

I will tag a member of the forum who is very knowledgeable about SW objects: @Taupou

 

I tried to take the best possible pictures. Let me know if these help

 

Front of the kachina

 

First, it depends on what you mean by “authentic.” To a collector, historian, and purist, a kachina doll must be carved by a Hopi or Zuni carver, from cottonwood root, and portray an actual kachina from their religion/culture, (since neither the Navajo, or any other non-puebloan tribe or culture has kachinas, but carve strictly as a type of "folk art," primarily for the tourist market.) This does not have the appearance of the commonly found Navajo carvings, however, which is a good sign.

Since it apparently has no signature, one can’t tell if the carver is Hopi or Zuni, so you look for whether or not it is authentic: does it accurately depict a carving as it would be made during a specific time period? Hopi kachina dolls have been made, over the years, in several different styles. This rather stiff and roughly carved pose is associated with the roughly 1910-1930 period, however the use of peasant feathers dates to the 1970s, when the Migratory Bird Treaty banned the use of trationally-used feathers. In addition, the blue color used on the neck area is apparently a recent addition or repaint, as is the black area, shown in the photo closest to the glass, which is not a good sign.

The rain cloud symbol on the cheeks is found on three common kachina dolls, Early Morning, the Mashanta Flower, and Silent Kachinas, but all three should have a ruff in the space between the body and the case mask. It might have had one originally, which would explain the repainted blue area.

The "wear" is not what would be found on a kachina doll from the 1930s, especially on the black base, which may have been made in the style of those during that time, but it doesn't show wear consistent with wear on the figure itself.

Today, kachina dolls in all styles are found, so this may be a recent attempt to make an older style, or an older style that was “up-dated” by a Hopi, or by a non-Hopi former owner. There is just no way to tell. But I would say it is not “authentic” in terms of being in the original condition as when it was made, or in accurately depicting an actual kachina.

That doesn't necessarily mean someone isn't going to want it, just that it does have issues regarding when it was made, or by whom.

 

Wow,great comment and very interesting information. Thank you

 

Thanks Taupou for the detailed reply, I had some knowledge about them but nowhere near yours!! Hope my next purchase goes better

 

Love. Love. Love. Your assessments are always so very helpful. Thank you so much.

 

it's a nice looking doll
250 is a good learning experience .....
not enuf to break you
but enuf to make u think twice , next time you're bidding on an item...... u should know more about...

 

This happens all the time to us leaners. Present your proposed purchases here first, so you can get some feedback before you buy.