Featured NETSUKE ARTIST & AGE IDENTIFICATION REQUEST!.

Thank You,

HMAC

 

Looks like it could be ivory,need photo of the bottom of the piece.You can go to edit and remove duplicate photos.

 

Not old, 20th century, no wear, these rubbed against the robe and sash. No wear to the cord holes. If it really is that yellow and not just the lighting, it is tea stained.

 

HERE IS THE BOTTOM.



THANKS!....

 

It's ivory,it is also signed but unless you can identify the carver there is no way of finding out the age of the piece.

 

Thank You, Sir.....

 

I agree. And it is ivory. Charming subject, but not a top piece.
The signature (upside down) is not in the online lists I checked. Given the quality of the carving it won't be in netsuke books like Raymond Bushell's either.

 

The more I look, the more I feel unsettled by this. It's trying too hard. Seemingly Schreger lines everywhere you look; a riot of shades of yellow - brown. It may just be the way it is painted/patinated, but looks to me like it could be several separate pieces. @HMAC what are the measurements?

 

Do you mean the writing box separate from the scribe? I see what you mean by the schreger lines riot. And they are more defined by the staining.

 

The body of the man & writing box look like separate pieces to me. The scroll could be another piece, as could the right arm. The way all those creases have been darkened makes me feel it's to hide joins. And have never handled an ivory piece that had such conspicuous Schreger lines over such large areas. Maybe I would perceive it differently if I had it in hand; with only the posted pix, I have major doubts.

 

This just looks very wrong to me for carved ivory:

 

Mammoth ivory

 

Possibly, I did wonder. Having trouble getting a fix on the lines & the angles. Still think it has been pieced.

For comparison.
https://www.fws.gov/lab/images/mammsmal.jpg
https://www.fws.gov/lab/images/elepschr.jpg

 

The angle is too wide for mammoth ivory imo. It looks like elephant ivory.

 

You can tell by the holes (himotoshi) that this isn't old or functional. One should be noticeably larger than the other. The smaller hole was adequate to thread the cord, the larger big enough to hide the knot at the end of the cord. Also, the holes should be situated so that, when worn, the figure displays upright. This one would be laying on its back.

https://www.jncohen.net/Japanese-Netsuke/Cordhole.htm

 

The holes are not always a different size. This is the back of one of my authenticated antique ones. It does have wear in and around the holes, but no size difference.

 

Full image of the bottom the cross-hatching looks carved and even more likely tea stained. Maybe Tagua nut.

 

How would you get the Schreger effect with tagua nut? Otherwise I could see it.

 

Carve it right in to the surface then tea stain it for shadowing.

 

It exist a near perfect imitation made in France with resin, not this item, just for info.
Totally out of subject but I have to say that for my personal peace.
This item is just what irritate me with the use of ivory for faking, I don't accept the use of protected material to make things which can open a market, despite this is made with old ivory, repairing interesting culturally and historically items with old ivory is another way.
You know than illegal trade of protected species/parts/material or living animals make actually between 15 and 20 billion € through the world, this use is a part of this trade, this is my personal opinion, if that's a problem for the forum, I take that post away immediately.