| RESULTS You Be the Judge... Kota mbulu-ngulu figures |
| Hunters obamba photographed by E Anderson in the area of Mossendjo, Congo in the Thirties. |
| Well, after many hours (I lost count a while ago), the Kota mbulu ngulu “You Be the Judge” page is coming to a close with the results finally being published. I’d like to first of all thank my partner for putting up with me since I started this project, actually for just putting up with me and my African Art period! I have spent lots of time hidden away in the basement office on my computer scanning images and text, painstakingly applying the black background to these images, answering and writing emails, working on translating text from French to English, researching and publishing things to my website, and now recently spending time putting the results together and creating the results page. Thanks for your patience! I’d also like to thank Frédéric Cloth for his contribution to the page. He was kind enough to give me some of the background information showing some auction history he had on quite a few of the pieces, which was great. It actually saved me a lot of time, and sanity, when I was finishing up the results page in the wee hours of the morning. I had a lot of the information put together for each piece on my own but had some technical problems and lost a lot of it and was going to have to go back through all of my books and compile everything again. So thanks Frédéric! Thanks to Des Bovey for pointing me in good directions for research and providing me with various pieces of information, articles and support during the project. Thanks Des! I don’t feel that what I did on this little project of mine was earth shattering, but it was worth all of the time and energy I put into it. I hope that the results page, and the rest of the information on the various Kota pages, will be a good online visual resource and informational resource for people who are interested in these figures or interested in learning about them. I stated on the Kota “You Be the Judge” page that I picked the topic of Kota mbulu ngulu figures because I didn’t know anything about them and that I had never really been interested in them up until now. Part of the reason I wanted to learn more about them is because in almost every major auction catalog these figures were present, and they seemed to always bring high sale prices. It confused me because most of the figures I saw were ‘newer’ looking and were so much unlike most of the items in African Art that I was interested in. It confused me and I wondered why these items were so popular and why they brought high prices and exactly what it was about a figure that made it good. It was hard to tell since the pieces were a mix of wood and metal, and the two different medias aged differently and had different qualities. Usually when I get interested in an item I will seek one out to buy for myself, and this case was no different. I did some looking around and I finally ended up with a figure that appealed to my eye, and a figure that I thought seemed to have good signs of age and style. Of course, I didn’t want to mortgage the house just to buy a figure so another factor in my decision on a figure was price (I didn’t find a published piece that I liked and try to track down the owner of the piece to see if it was for sale). I ended up finding a piece that came from the collection of Dr. Otto Billigs who was a psychologist, and a published author, as well as being an avid African Art collector for many years. I won’t say how much I paid for my figure, but I will tell you that after doing this exercise that I think I ended up with a pretty damn good deal! My piece is figure # 11. I am a very visual person, if you haven’t already come to that conclusion from my website, and it’s important for me to have an item in my hand when I am researching that type of item and the people who originally made that type of item. I think a very important thing to be able to do before you buy an item is to be able to look at it up close, touch it, draw from what you’ve learned about items like it and hopefully make a good decision to buy it or not to buy it. I wasn’t able to do that with the piece I bought, but I was pleased once I did get it in. It was a learning piece, I’ll probably hold on to it for a while since I do like it though. So what did I learn or accomplish by all of this? What did I learn from the voting and the comments on the various styles of Kota mbulu ngulu figures by other people of varied knowledge and experience? My goal in all of this was to get a range of different styles of Kota figures together, strip them of the gallery or professional backdrop (or lack of backdrop) and give them all an even playing field. I wanted to just post all of the images in as good of quality as I could, without any information on the pieces, and let people have an opportunity to state their thoughts about each piece in a way that they would not feel intimidated like they would in a ‘discussion group’ format. I was hoping that people would be open with their comments, since they would be anonymous, and really say what came to their minds. Did this work? Well, it did and it didn’t. At first I had technical difficulties with the comments section of the voting page and didn’t realize it for a few days or so. It was unfortunate because in these first few days there were a lot of votes (and probably comments), but the comments did not get captured because of my technical glitch. I thought I had tested it and it worked but apparently not. I fixed it and was able to capture all of the remaining comments that were made on the pieces. There was a lot of participation on the voting but the participation on the comments wasn’t so good. I don’t know if people were afraid that the comments would somehow be attributed to them or if people just didn’t have a lot to really say about the figures? I was proud of my Mom though, she has been learning little by little about African Art by having me as a son. She likes the “You Be the Judge” pages and is an active participant by reading and learning about the things that I post. She read through the introduction on the Kota figures and then went to work giving her comments and votes on each piece with the eye that she is developing. She made a great attempt to comment on every piece (her comments are usually the next to last comments on each piece), and hopefully in my next go around with a new topic to discuss, more people will follow her example and give the comments a shot, even if it is an item they don't know much about. Part of my goal behind this exercise was to have these pages be a place where people could go to and see these figures and see what other people, of various knowledge levels and experiences, had to say about each figure so they could compare it to their thoughts and help them in forming their own judgment. What did I learn? Well, I learned about a wonderful culture of people with a fascinating set of beliefs and traditions. They made items that were unlike most other African figures, and there was a wide range of styles of these figures as well. I also learned to appreciate these items and it made me try to think of the original person making the items and what was going through his mind. The authentic creation of these kind of reliquary guardian figures ceased around 1930 as a result of aggressive proselytizing by Christian missionaries, the imposition of a new social organization centered on the Western-style nuclear family, and indigenous movements aimed at destroying certain local religious practices. Consequently, many of these sculptures were destroyed by burning or concealed by burial. This fact adds to the “appeal” of these items by the African Art collectors of today. You will generally see these items as some of the higher priced items in a lot of the major auction house’s auctions. All or most of the figures I saw seemed to appear ‘newer’ to me, especially if the authentic creation of these types of figures ceased in the 1930’s! There were very few of the figures documentation that stated “when” they were collected or by “whom”. The descriptions mostly stated that they were from the collection of a “person” or from a “gallery” and most of them didn’t have, or allude to, any documentation to show any dates prior to the 60’s. Even if they did state it could it be proven? David Norden’s piece is one of the few that did state that it came with documentation and proof of collecting date, other than that I guess you have to take a leap of faith or the word of someone else. If you are out to buy pieces that are published in books or from famous collections as investment art, then maybe these pieces are for you?! As far as the appearance of the pieces, some of the figures were perhaps polished when they were brought back to Europe, since this is what “we” do with metal, right? I do understand that the figures also had different substances added to them that aided in the figures power by the people who made them, but a lot of the figures looked too new or contrived to me to be from 1930 or before. You have to look at the wood on the base, but wood can always be buried in a termite mound or dipped in some other substance to deteriorate it. These types of figures were probably being copied as early as the 30/40’s in my opinion. “As soon as you take liquor off of the shelves for the public to buy…..someone will start making it and selling it on the black market”. The prestige of these items has caused even the reproductions to command higher prices, but I guess this is what happens in the market right? Overall I am happy with the exercise. It gives me, and others, a place to go and look at different styles of these figures and see what others had to say about them, and see other people’s opinions if they thought the pieces were authentic or copies. I know that it is hard to tell from a photo, but it would have been hard to fly all of the pieces, and people, to one place to do a hands on learning experience, but wouldn’t that have been fun! If only I were a billionaire… My favorite pieces in the bunch were # 8 closely followed by # 1. The cowry shelled mouth of figure # 1 was unusual and I don’t think I have seen another example like this. Two different styles, but both beautiful in my eye. Figure # 21 is another figure that absolutely intrigues me. It appears to me to be a piece with significant age that has been possibly pieced back together like a figure that Louis Perrois found and reconstructed? Or was it metal from a very old piece that was given a new sub-structure when the original one broke? Whatever the history behind the piece is, I think it is a very interesting piece, I would love to unravel the mystery of it. Louis Perrois and Gerald Pestmal wrote a fascinating article on the discovery and restoration of two Hongwe figures that were found in a lake or pond. The article is in French though, and I haven’t had much luck translating it all yet but hope to soon. Click below to open or download the article in a new window (the file is very large): Perrois article Take the information below and compare it to your own eye and your own thoughts and draw your own conclusions. I have tried to present the results in a compact format that gives you the before and after picture, the results of the votes and most of the comments on the pieces. I hope that many of you found this interesting and hopefully a little educational. |
| The Results... |
| There were 355 hits on the original page (http://www.randafricanart.com/You_be_the_judge_Kota_figures.html) There were 90 people who participated on the original page and cast a total of 1530 overall votes on the 17 pieces on the original page. |
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 1 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 72 Copy = 9 Undecided = 9 |
| h=54cm Property of a Princeton Private Collector, 1979 Property of an American Private Collection, 1997 Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 09.11.1979. Lot 083, color illus. Bought $14000 Sotheby's-New York, 06.05.1998. Lot 202, color illus. Bought $41400 Sotheby's-New York, 16.11.2001. |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: beautifully done,with much reverence
Comments: Eyes and mouth not really typical. I have a feeling that this a fantasy piece based on 2-3 different kota figures
Comments: great harmony. one of my favorites.
Comments: In my opinion, has an odd newness aura about it.
Comments: Metal looks right, I would dare to say this figure is newer but authentic.
Comments: never seen a mouth like this, guessing it authentic
Comments: cowry shell for a mouth? Interesting. The metal and the wood on this figure are very good in my eye.
Comments: Although this is beautiful, it looks "contrived" and the mouth makes me think that it is not old or authentic since you said mouths were usually
not on the reliquary.
Comments: In terms of aesthetics and quality of workmanship, this piece appears to me to be a finer work of art. Another key consideration for me is that
in comparison with other pieces, more CARE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN (emphasis accidental) in the detailed etching in the center of the "chignon"
hairstyle as well as in the uniformity of the narrow horizontal strips applied above the eyes. The cowrie in the mouth makes me wonder, though, as I can't
recall ever seeing cowries used on pieces from this area -- which makes me wonder...did someone put it there to appeal to foreign collectors. The "base"
looks aged and, if authentic, perhaps shows wear in the center from the rope tied to secure it to its reliquary basket. But, how to be certain???
Comments: beautifully done,with much reverence
Comments: Eyes and mouth not really typical. I have a feeling that this a fantasy piece based on 2-3 different kota figures
Comments: great harmony. one of my favorites.
Comments: In my opinion, has an odd newness aura about it.
Comments: Metal looks right, I would dare to say this figure is newer but authentic.
Comments: never seen a mouth like this, guessing it authentic
Comments: cowry shell for a mouth? Interesting. The metal and the wood on this figure are very good in my eye.
Comments: Although this is beautiful, it looks "contrived" and the mouth makes me think that it is not old or authentic since you said mouths were usually
not on the reliquary.
Comments: In terms of aesthetics and quality of workmanship, this piece appears to me to be a finer work of art. Another key consideration for me is that
in comparison with other pieces, more CARE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN (emphasis accidental) in the detailed etching in the center of the "chignon"
hairstyle as well as in the uniformity of the narrow horizontal strips applied above the eyes. The cowrie in the mouth makes me wonder, though, as I can't
recall ever seeing cowries used on pieces from this area -- which makes me wonder...did someone put it there to appeal to foreign collectors. The "base"
looks aged and, if authentic, perhaps shows wear in the center from the rope tied to secure it to its reliquary basket. But, how to be certain???
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 2 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 27 Copy = 9 Undecided = 54 |
| Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 16 November 2001. Estimate $8,000 - $12,000 Comments: compare to No.145 in "L'Art Kota" (Chaffin). Published: Perrois, 1979; 173 figure 168 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Dosen’t fit any of the regional styles I know of. And it’s ugly too ;-)
Comments: it just looks right
Comments: It's so hard to tell with this one, something about it makes me thing it's so ugly it has to be real? But something tells me that it might be a bad
reproduction? Undecided
Comments: pretty "unorthodox", but then, there were a lot of wacky reliquaires! Rough workmanship but authentic looking metal pins.
Comments: very unusual so unlikely a copy. The very radial feel produced from the 12 bars is nice.
Comments: The workmanship appears to crude, the lines don't appear straight. It looks like it was made in a hurry.
Comments: Made to look old, in my opinion. You said that authentic pieces usually did not (surprisingly) look old.
Comments: Because I really don't know whether authentic Kota pieces were required to be finely crafted or whether there was significant variation in the
degree of refinement, I feel tentative in venturing a guess at this point. If the piece was ever religiously significant, it sure was handled roughly -- which
makes me wonder. Aesthetically, I am not really moved by Figure 2 nor can I recall seeing authentic pieces where the metal was so loosely applied as
to show the amount of disturbance.
Comments: Dosen’t fit any of the regional styles I know of. And it’s ugly too ;-)
Comments: it just looks right
Comments: It's so hard to tell with this one, something about it makes me thing it's so ugly it has to be real? But something tells me that it might be a bad
reproduction? Undecided
Comments: pretty "unorthodox", but then, there were a lot of wacky reliquaires! Rough workmanship but authentic looking metal pins.
Comments: very unusual so unlikely a copy. The very radial feel produced from the 12 bars is nice.
Comments: The workmanship appears to crude, the lines don't appear straight. It looks like it was made in a hurry.
Comments: Made to look old, in my opinion. You said that authentic pieces usually did not (surprisingly) look old.
Comments: Because I really don't know whether authentic Kota pieces were required to be finely crafted or whether there was significant variation in the
degree of refinement, I feel tentative in venturing a guess at this point. If the piece was ever religiously significant, it sure was handled roughly -- which
makes me wonder. Aesthetically, I am not really moved by Figure 2 nor can I recall seeing authentic pieces where the metal was so loosely applied as
to show the amount of disturbance.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 3 |
| Figure # 13 (above) is actually the reverse of Figure # 3 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 63 Copy = 27 Undecided = 0 |
| h=73.7cm Brought to France in 1933. Collection de mesieur J.A., Administrator de la France d'Outre-Mer. Pierre Nahon, Vence Various properties, 1981 Property from an American Private Collection, 1999 Publication(s): Galerie Beaubourg, Quelques Impressions D'Afrique, 1996:300-301. Auction(s): Drouot-Paris, 10.12.1980. Lot 097, illus. Unsold. Est. FF 80/100000 Sotheby's-London, 23.06.1981. Lot 168, illus. Unsold. Est. 6/7000 pound Sotheby's-New York, 19.11.1999. Lot 260, color illus. Unsold. Est. $125/175000 Sotheby's-New York, 16.11.2001. Lot 112, color illus. Estimate $60,000 - $90,000 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: beautiful
Comments: Figure has a "newness" about it and then you have the base which looks like it was made to look old. Copy
Comments: touristy
Comments: Nicely designed and the metalwork is carefully marked.
Comments: The wood looks like I would expect it to, meaning old. But the metal looks almost brand new?!?
Comments: I think this may be authentic, but the center of the piece..the metal strip and eyes make me think it may not be.
Comments: This one has many of the characteristics seen in Figure 1 -- the detail on the chignon, the finer metal strips (although carried lower on the
face. But the metalwork does not seem so carefully applied. thus, it does not suggest a degree of respect that one might expect from a ritual piece that
links to the ancestors. But is this my value of one applicable to the Kota peoples (or this sub-group)?
Comments: beautiful
Comments: Figure has a "newness" about it and then you have the base which looks like it was made to look old. Copy
Comments: touristy
Comments: Nicely designed and the metalwork is carefully marked.
Comments: The wood looks like I would expect it to, meaning old. But the metal looks almost brand new?!?
Comments: I think this may be authentic, but the center of the piece..the metal strip and eyes make me think it may not be.
Comments: This one has many of the characteristics seen in Figure 1 -- the detail on the chignon, the finer metal strips (although carried lower on the
face. But the metalwork does not seem so carefully applied. thus, it does not suggest a degree of respect that one might expect from a ritual piece that
links to the ancestors. But is this my value of one applicable to the Kota peoples (or this sub-group)?
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 4 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 72 Copy = 0 Undecided = 18 |
| h=62cm Felix Feneon, Paris Kerchache, 1988 Arman, 1996 Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 8 May 1996. Lot 112, color illus. Estimate $40-$60k Bought $40250 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Again, there is that "newness" quality with an old base but this piece looks more uniformly old to me. Authentic
Comments: feels old
Comments: guessed authentic, but could be a copy. Shaky lines. Probably Obamba, but not sure about the eyes
Comments: not sure about this one. Could be an old authentic but...
Comments: Nice form and detail on this piece
Comments: The detail and patina on this reliquary make me think it's authentic.
Comments: While not so fine as some, my gut reaction suggests that given the number of individual points hammered and the relative amount of skill and
patience involved in finishing this piece, I am willing to lean toward authenticity on this piece in spite of some of the rough edges. Information that would be
helpful here is more information on the relative wealth and availability of resources among the different communities that created this style of piece.
Comments: Again, there is that "newness" quality with an old base but this piece looks more uniformly old to me. Authentic
Comments: feels old
Comments: guessed authentic, but could be a copy. Shaky lines. Probably Obamba, but not sure about the eyes
Comments: not sure about this one. Could be an old authentic but...
Comments: Nice form and detail on this piece
Comments: The detail and patina on this reliquary make me think it's authentic.
Comments: While not so fine as some, my gut reaction suggests that given the number of individual points hammered and the relative amount of skill and
patience involved in finishing this piece, I am willing to lean toward authenticity on this piece in spite of some of the rough edges. Information that would be
helpful here is more information on the relative wealth and availability of resources among the different communities that created this style of piece.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 5 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 45 Copy = 18 Undecided = 27 |
| h=56cm Helena Rubinstein, New York, till 1966 Auction(s): Parke Bernet Galleries, The Helena Rubinstein Collection, New York 1966. Lot 193, illus. Bought $2000 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Elements of 2-3 styles
Comments: looks new
Comments: Nice "classic" design
Comments: To me, the metal looks newer and tried to made to look old and the base looks the same way. Copy
Comments: looks new to me
Comments: if it is a copy - its a good one.
Comments: Another one where the metal and the wood don't seem to have the right age?
Comments: Hmm...what do I know? I'd buy it for thousands of dollars.. is that a tear coming from the eye?
Comments: My favorite element of this piece is the distressed wood on the bottom. But, the applied metal and the etching all seem to be so hastily and
carelessly executed as if mass produced to fill an order. So -- again lacking the expertise and insight required for a strongly based critique, I'm just going
with my aesthetic and gut reactions to say that this is inauthentic.
Comments: Elements of 2-3 styles
Comments: looks new
Comments: Nice "classic" design
Comments: To me, the metal looks newer and tried to made to look old and the base looks the same way. Copy
Comments: looks new to me
Comments: if it is a copy - its a good one.
Comments: Another one where the metal and the wood don't seem to have the right age?
Comments: Hmm...what do I know? I'd buy it for thousands of dollars.. is that a tear coming from the eye?
Comments: My favorite element of this piece is the distressed wood on the bottom. But, the applied metal and the etching all seem to be so hastily and
carelessly executed as if mass produced to fill an order. So -- again lacking the expertise and insight required for a strongly based critique, I'm just going
with my aesthetic and gut reactions to say that this is inauthentic.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 6 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 27 Copy = 36 Undecided = 27 |
| h=80cm Property of a Belgian Private Collection, 1998 Estimate $15,000 - $25,000 Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 22.11.1998. Lot 299, color illus. |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: looks new
Comments: nice but not one of my favorites. very naive and not so well executed.
Comments: seems a bit fishy to me, without being able to say why…
Comments: Sloppy workmanship
Comments: The metal work on this piece is strange to me. The mouth doesn't look right and the metal on the base doesn't look right. COPY
Comments: well-balanced shape and form
Comments: Sloppy style and the base seems wrong to me
Comments: Contrived. Looks like one of the pieces you didn't like.
Comments: While not so fine as some others, my intuition is suggesting that this is merely a different style from others I have seen. And the inclusion of a
wide range of geometric patterns applied suggests real effort and meaning inherent in the piece.
Comments: looks new
Comments: nice but not one of my favorites. very naive and not so well executed.
Comments: seems a bit fishy to me, without being able to say why…
Comments: Sloppy workmanship
Comments: The metal work on this piece is strange to me. The mouth doesn't look right and the metal on the base doesn't look right. COPY
Comments: well-balanced shape and form
Comments: Sloppy style and the base seems wrong to me
Comments: Contrived. Looks like one of the pieces you didn't like.
Comments: While not so fine as some others, my intuition is suggesting that this is merely a different style from others I have seen. And the inclusion of a
wide range of geometric patterns applied suggests real effort and meaning inherent in the piece.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 7 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 63 Copy = 0 Undecided = 27 |
| h=33.7cm Bernard Dulon, Paris, 1992 Michel Koenig, Brussels, 1994 Other Properties, 1998 Publication(s): Arts d'Afrique Moire, no.82, 1992. Bernard Dulon (Salon de Mars) Expo cat.: Arts Primitifs, Brussels 22 June 1994. Page 37, color (Michel Koenig). Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 22.11.1998. Lot 314, color illus. Estimate $15,000 - $20,000 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: another one of my favorites.
Comments: hard to tell
Comments: looks right,feels right
Comments: Nice metal work, appears to have even aging. Authentic
Comments: One of my favorites, the detail in the metal work is great and the wood and the metal seem to have the same age I would expect.
Comments: Obamba stylish, but the bent in the body is wrong, it should bend sharply, also the coiffure looks too small
Comments: Only guessing. The loop instead of a lozange may indicate that it was an intermediary form... (Or a forger's fantasy?)
Comments: The mouth..and the headdress are different than any others you've shown. I like this as a piece of art, but I don't know if it is authentic. I think
it may be.
Comments: Figure 7 appears to me the most labor-intensive and thoughtful example thus far. The complexity, artistry, craftsmanship and apparent age
suggest quality and authenticity.
Comments: another one of my favorites.
Comments: hard to tell
Comments: looks right,feels right
Comments: Nice metal work, appears to have even aging. Authentic
Comments: One of my favorites, the detail in the metal work is great and the wood and the metal seem to have the same age I would expect.
Comments: Obamba stylish, but the bent in the body is wrong, it should bend sharply, also the coiffure looks too small
Comments: Only guessing. The loop instead of a lozange may indicate that it was an intermediary form... (Or a forger's fantasy?)
Comments: The mouth..and the headdress are different than any others you've shown. I like this as a piece of art, but I don't know if it is authentic. I think
it may be.
Comments: Figure 7 appears to me the most labor-intensive and thoughtful example thus far. The complexity, artistry, craftsmanship and apparent age
suggest quality and authenticity.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 8 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 63 Copy = 0 Undecided = 27 |
| h=40cm The Kuhn Collection of African Art, 1991 Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 20.11.1991. Lot 84, color illus. Estimate $40,000 - $60,000 Bought $25300 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Although this one has a unique style, it is my favorite piece and I am going with my gut.
Comments: BEAUTIFUL, haven't I seen it published somewhere
Comments: Have seen more refined examples in this baroque style, but guess authentic. Strange that the losange, if it followed the lines suggested,
wouldn't "join up"
Comments: looks new
Comments: If this is a fake it is a good one. There is something about the face and the metal colors that I love.
Comments: published in The tribal arts of Africa by Bacquart
Comments: wonderful
Comments: the metals appear to have been stressed by heat to give a very pretty colour
Comments: Metal pounded to look old. Too modernly artistic.
Comments: Reminiscent of at least one other I have seen in the style of the Ndassa Woumbou, this one may be authentic for its diverse range of detailed
elements. However, the over-all quality of work and condition do not recommend this piece to me as particularly authentic or beautiful.
Comments: Although this one has a unique style, it is my favorite piece and I am going with my gut.
Comments: BEAUTIFUL, haven't I seen it published somewhere
Comments: Have seen more refined examples in this baroque style, but guess authentic. Strange that the losange, if it followed the lines suggested,
wouldn't "join up"
Comments: looks new
Comments: If this is a fake it is a good one. There is something about the face and the metal colors that I love.
Comments: published in The tribal arts of Africa by Bacquart
Comments: wonderful
Comments: the metals appear to have been stressed by heat to give a very pretty colour
Comments: Metal pounded to look old. Too modernly artistic.
Comments: Reminiscent of at least one other I have seen in the style of the Ndassa Woumbou, this one may be authentic for its diverse range of detailed
elements. However, the over-all quality of work and condition do not recommend this piece to me as particularly authentic or beautiful.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 9 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 36 Copy = 45 Undecided = 9 |
| h=59.4cm Private collection, Bordeaux-France, (collected 1920-1950) Le Corneur/Roudillon, Paris, 1968 Property from Mr. And Mrs. Klaus Perls Collection of Tribal Art, 1995 Publication(s): Expo cat.: Collection d'un amateur art negre, Galerie Le Corneur Roudillon, Paris 17 May-8 June 1968, figure 12, illus. Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 04.05.1995. Lot 83, color illus. Estimate $20,000 - $30,000 Bought $18400 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: funny mouth
Comments: If I were to judge this one I would say it was newer, mouth doesn't look right, metal looks new.
Comments: looks new
Comments: mouth doesn't cut it
Comments: Should the wires also appear on the outer frame?
Comments: Copy...not sure why! Maybe its the mouth and teeth?
Comments: Again, Too "modern" in style for the time period you mentioned.
Comments: Figure 9 like Figure 8 does not strike me as particularly fine or beautiful but some details in the metalwork's range of patterns seem to suggest
the possibility of authenticity.
Comments: funny mouth
Comments: If I were to judge this one I would say it was newer, mouth doesn't look right, metal looks new.
Comments: looks new
Comments: mouth doesn't cut it
Comments: Should the wires also appear on the outer frame?
Comments: Copy...not sure why! Maybe its the mouth and teeth?
Comments: Again, Too "modern" in style for the time period you mentioned.
Comments: Figure 9 like Figure 8 does not strike me as particularly fine or beautiful but some details in the metalwork's range of patterns seem to suggest
the possibility of authenticity.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 10 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 54 Copy = 36 Undecided = 0 |
| h=37.5cm Eastern European Family Collection from the 1920s. Property of a European Private Collector, 1995 Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 04.05.1995. Lot 82, color illus. Estimate $15,000 - $20,000 Bought $18400 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: eyes and mouth a no no
Comments: looks new
Comments: Something about this piece says authentic. Nice style and metal work. Authentic
Comments: Something wrong with the proportions and the smile
Comments: appears a very friendly version - which might make it for the tourist market.
Comments: Hell if I know. Copy, I think.
Comments: Lacking the quality of craftsmanship and the fineness of detail of the examples I have seen (LIMITED) of the Obamba Ndoumou style perhaps ,
this piece might still be authentic. I just haven't seen enough to know!!!!
Comments: eyes and mouth a no no
Comments: looks new
Comments: Something about this piece says authentic. Nice style and metal work. Authentic
Comments: Something wrong with the proportions and the smile
Comments: appears a very friendly version - which might make it for the tourist market.
Comments: Hell if I know. Copy, I think.
Comments: Lacking the quality of craftsmanship and the fineness of detail of the examples I have seen (LIMITED) of the Obamba Ndoumou style perhaps ,
this piece might still be authentic. I just haven't seen enough to know!!!!
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 11 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 54 Copy = 27 Undecided = 9 |
| This one is mine... 20" tall Provenance: Dr. Otto Billigs (1910 - 1989) Collection. Dr. Billigs was a Psychiatrist, published author and an avid African Art collector Through some research, this figure was traced back to have links in a Paris gallery in the time frame of 1950-1960 and photos of the piece were sent to me that came from the gallery and I am still doing research to trace the origins on this figure. The piece was reviewed in person by Rebecca Perry at Sotheby's and was stated to be authentic in her opinion. If you want to see all pictures of this piece click here to see the photos in a new window. |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: another one of my favorites.
Comments: Doesn't feel quite right
Comments: just feels new to me
Comments: lacks refinement and finish
Comments: Nails look old, metal looks old and the base has signs of worn patina that look real. Nice style. Authentic
Comments: the best
Comments: The piece has a different style but it is a good style in my opinion. Wood and metal both have the looks of age that I would expect.
Comments: well balanced and appears to be right.
Comments: A bit crude in style, looks more authentically old in detail. But it's probably a copy..how do you like that for indecision..
Comments: DITTO from previous figure: Lacking the quality of craftsmanship and the fineness of detail of the examples I have seen (LIMITED) of the
Obamba Ndoumou style perhaps , this piece might still be authentic. I just haven't seen enough to know!!!!
Comments: another one of my favorites.
Comments: Doesn't feel quite right
Comments: just feels new to me
Comments: lacks refinement and finish
Comments: Nails look old, metal looks old and the base has signs of worn patina that look real. Nice style. Authentic
Comments: the best
Comments: The piece has a different style but it is a good style in my opinion. Wood and metal both have the looks of age that I would expect.
Comments: well balanced and appears to be right.
Comments: A bit crude in style, looks more authentically old in detail. But it's probably a copy..how do you like that for indecision..
Comments: DITTO from previous figure: Lacking the quality of craftsmanship and the fineness of detail of the examples I have seen (LIMITED) of the
Obamba Ndoumou style perhaps , this piece might still be authentic. I just haven't seen enough to know!!!!
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 12 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 63 Copy = 18 Undecided = 9 |
| h=57cm Charles Ratton, 1970 Hubert Goldet, Paris, 2001 Publication(s): Arts d'Afrique et d'Oceanie, Cannes 1957, no. 199 Elisofon and Fagg, The Sculpture of Africa, London, 1958:183, no.226 Douglas Fraser, L'Art Primitif. Paris 1962:77 and title page. Objets et Mondes, Paris, 1970, Tome X, Fasc.2, Charles Ratton Chaffin, Alain & Francoise. L'Art Kota. Les figures de reliquaire. Meudon, 1979:144, no.56. Musée dapper, Los Angeles Vie des Ancètres. Paris, 1986, no. 40 Exhibition(s): Cannes, July-September 1957 Paris: Musée Dapper, November 1986, February 1987 Auction(s): de Ricqles, Paris, Arts Primitifs, Collection Hubert Goldet. Paris 30.06.2001. Lot 270, color illus. Estimate FF 800,000 - 1,000,000 Bought FF 2,200,000 ($291,000.00 USD) |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Beautiful piece, though might be a mixture of styles
Comments: definitely new
Comments: looks new
Comments: nice!
Comments: Something about this one doesn't seem right, seems newer, maybe it is the style? I'm giving it an authentic though from my gut.
Comments: this piece has incredible energy and harmony. this one is my most favorite. oh to be a rich man.
Comments: Nice workmanship - wood appears to be original.
Comments: This is the Goldet one, looks brand new to me except for the distressed wood. It's amazing that this brought the price it did in my opinion.
Comments: Hard to say. It looks Egyptian. I think it's a copy
Comments: Not my favorite form over-all but the symmetry of the metalwork and the beautiful aged appearance of the base -- not to mention the quality of
the neck embellishments make me think and feel positively about this piece.
Comments: Beautiful piece, though might be a mixture of styles
Comments: definitely new
Comments: looks new
Comments: nice!
Comments: Something about this one doesn't seem right, seems newer, maybe it is the style? I'm giving it an authentic though from my gut.
Comments: this piece has incredible energy and harmony. this one is my most favorite. oh to be a rich man.
Comments: Nice workmanship - wood appears to be original.
Comments: This is the Goldet one, looks brand new to me except for the distressed wood. It's amazing that this brought the price it did in my opinion.
Comments: Hard to say. It looks Egyptian. I think it's a copy
Comments: Not my favorite form over-all but the symmetry of the metalwork and the beautiful aged appearance of the base -- not to mention the quality of
the neck embellishments make me think and feel positively about this piece.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 13 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size high resolution image. Results: Authentic = 36 Copy = 45 Undecided = 9 |
| Figure # 3 (above) is the opposite side of Figure # 13 |
| SEE INFORMATION FOR FIGURE # 3 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: looks new
Comments: not one of my favorites.
Comments: something about it's simplicity
Comments: The base looks like the same one on figure 3
Comments: unusual
Comments: AGAIN with the metal and the wood looking like they came from different pieces.
Comments: seems to be out of balance - one side of top isn't lined up with other.
Comments: There's the mouth again. But it's simple and dosen't look like it's made to look old, so it probably is.
Comments: While I find this figure not particularly fine in detail, I like the simplicity of form and execution -- and the staples in the wood base suggest
perhaps that this was once attached to a reliquary basket or bundle of some sort. (or is that what I am supposed to think????)
Comments: looks new
Comments: not one of my favorites.
Comments: something about it's simplicity
Comments: The base looks like the same one on figure 3
Comments: unusual
Comments: AGAIN with the metal and the wood looking like they came from different pieces.
Comments: seems to be out of balance - one side of top isn't lined up with other.
Comments: There's the mouth again. But it's simple and dosen't look like it's made to look old, so it probably is.
Comments: While I find this figure not particularly fine in detail, I like the simplicity of form and execution -- and the staples in the wood base suggest
perhaps that this was once attached to a reliquary basket or bundle of some sort. (or is that what I am supposed to think????)
| Original picture not available |
| blackout picture |
| FIGURE # 14 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 45 Copy = 27 Undecided = 18 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: classic
Comments: Hard to tell, metal and wood look aged, not many style flaws in my opinion. But giving it an undecided.
Comments: looks new
Comments: looks new
Comments: OK piece
Comments: Don't know about this one. The patina is different that the others. It's hard for me to say..Just one metal used on this one?
Comments: Detailed but sloppy...Hmmmmm...Again, I wish I knew the range of acceptable variation in the crafting of these pieces. Hard to know given the
number of groups and the passage of time.
Comments: classic
Comments: Hard to tell, metal and wood look aged, not many style flaws in my opinion. But giving it an undecided.
Comments: looks new
Comments: looks new
Comments: OK piece
Comments: Don't know about this one. The patina is different that the others. It's hard for me to say..Just one metal used on this one?
Comments: Detailed but sloppy...Hmmmmm...Again, I wish I knew the range of acceptable variation in the crafting of these pieces. Hard to know given the
number of groups and the passage of time.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 15 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 45 Copy = 18 Undecided = 27 |
| h=35cm Acquired in Paris in the 1950's Property from the Frum Collection, 1996 Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 08.05.1996. Lot 111, color illus. Unsold. Est. $15/20000 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Bad proportions and sloppy workmanship
Comments: crudely carved and plated, but not without charm. Guessing it's a copy
Comments: Gut feel authentic. Not very good style though, I wouldn't buy it.
Comments: made to look old
Comments: not too well executed (in my mind)
Comments: strange style
Comments: crude and lacking the style you would expect
Comments: I'm not really sure why I think this is..maybe the unusual hole at the top of the piece and rather crude design.
Comments: I think my brain is starting to melt but...lack of symmetry and apparent skill...
Comments: Bad proportions and sloppy workmanship
Comments: crudely carved and plated, but not without charm. Guessing it's a copy
Comments: Gut feel authentic. Not very good style though, I wouldn't buy it.
Comments: made to look old
Comments: not too well executed (in my mind)
Comments: strange style
Comments: crude and lacking the style you would expect
Comments: I'm not really sure why I think this is..maybe the unusual hole at the top of the piece and rather crude design.
Comments: I think my brain is starting to melt but...lack of symmetry and apparent skill...
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 16 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 0 Copy = 72 Undecided = 18 |
Well, of course I had to call the Bakarat Gallery and "request" the price. When I called Bakarat Gallery and asked for the price of the item they were very nice and told me it was in their London location and the asking price was 14000 pounds (or on today's conversion rate that would be $25,738.90 USD!) Simply amazing! No history on the piece, no provenance, no collection date. |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Base looks wrong and that's enough for me. COPY
Comments: Beautiful, but....
Comments: Doesn't feel right, even allowing for the garish lighting. Stippled base seems fishy. The wire strips may even be a single plate!
Comments: looks new
Comments: looks new
Comments: The artificially aged base (way too uniform), wired ear-lobe spindles, very rounded interface from head to crest, and reasonable plain surfaces
make me suspicious.
Comments: The aspect on the wood and the wires are wrong
Comments: I like it - very pretty and well carved designs
Comments: The base is totally wrong, looks brand new
Comments: Contrived.
Comments: I like the range of detail and general quality...except toward the bottom where craftsmanship and symmetry seem to fall away. Also, this is the
only such object where the metalwork covers the entire base...
Comments: Base looks wrong and that's enough for me. COPY
Comments: Beautiful, but....
Comments: Doesn't feel right, even allowing for the garish lighting. Stippled base seems fishy. The wire strips may even be a single plate!
Comments: looks new
Comments: looks new
Comments: The artificially aged base (way too uniform), wired ear-lobe spindles, very rounded interface from head to crest, and reasonable plain surfaces
make me suspicious.
Comments: The aspect on the wood and the wires are wrong
Comments: I like it - very pretty and well carved designs
Comments: The base is totally wrong, looks brand new
Comments: Contrived.
Comments: I like the range of detail and general quality...except toward the bottom where craftsmanship and symmetry seem to fall away. Also, this is the
only such object where the metalwork covers the entire base...
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 17 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 63 Copy = 9 Undecided = 18 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Another nice one.
Comments: Another one that's hard to tell, nice style, uniform age to me. Authentic
Comments: Lovely
Comments: Neat piece
Comments: same guy made 14
Comments: Nice style, nice apparent age
Comments: Looks much like an earlier one that I couldn't decide on but the unusual "wear" on the right wing, (I don't think the base looks as old) make me
think that it's authentic.
Comments: This one seems to have had a real life. Not my favorite form but nice (not stellar) metalwork but signs of real skill and care -- to my eye and
taste anyway.
Comments: Another nice one.
Comments: Another one that's hard to tell, nice style, uniform age to me. Authentic
Comments: Lovely
Comments: Neat piece
Comments: same guy made 14
Comments: Nice style, nice apparent age
Comments: Looks much like an earlier one that I couldn't decide on but the unusual "wear" on the right wing, (I don't think the base looks as old) make me
think that it's authentic.
Comments: This one seems to have had a real life. Not my favorite form but nice (not stellar) metalwork but signs of real skill and care -- to my eye and
taste anyway.
| Figures 18 - 22 were part of Kota PAGE 2 that were added much later than the original pieces. They were out on my website a lot shorter period of time than the rest. There were 127 hits on PAGE 2 and there were 48 participants that voted and commented on the PAGE 2 figures |
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 18 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 28 Copy = 12 Undecided = 8 |
| This piece belongs to David Norden, it was purchased by his mother at Christies in Amsterdam in 1999 "This fine Bakota is coming from the grand-child of the missionaries Judith an Oscar Morfeldt ." DN Size: 70 cm high, collected between 1910-1919. It goes with some documentation: - Letter from Linda Morfeldt - Print out and description from Slides taken during 1910-1919 in Africa. - Provenance: Christies Amsterdam, December 1999. |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Not the best quality but old and authentic. The lozenge is not very old. You can only judge the style, you cannot see patina.
Comments: Classic piece, very nice
Comments: Has many of the elements recognizable in this sub-style of figure -- shape, etching, etc. but the base figure seems too short and wide.
The over-all feeling of the piece is rather flat and lifeless and does not suggest itself to be authentic or meaningful.
Comments: I'm not mad about the Barbie doll curls, but nice proportions, even if the croissant is a bit big (sort of country'n western big...)
Comments: Something about the style makes me uneasy about this piece. The base doesn't look to have much wear like you would see on an old piece.
Comments: looks like it's been used
Comments: Not one of my favorites, the crest doesn't look like it belongs, the base does not have the age or wear you would expect from an OLD piece
Comments: It is my mother's Kota, she bought it at a Christies Amsterdam auction, and it goes with the documentation from the Morfeld family who
collected it around 1910-1919
Comments: Not the best quality but old and authentic. The lozenge is not very old. You can only judge the style, you cannot see patina.
Comments: Classic piece, very nice
Comments: Has many of the elements recognizable in this sub-style of figure -- shape, etching, etc. but the base figure seems too short and wide.
The over-all feeling of the piece is rather flat and lifeless and does not suggest itself to be authentic or meaningful.
Comments: I'm not mad about the Barbie doll curls, but nice proportions, even if the croissant is a bit big (sort of country'n western big...)
Comments: Something about the style makes me uneasy about this piece. The base doesn't look to have much wear like you would see on an old piece.
Comments: looks like it's been used
Comments: Not one of my favorites, the crest doesn't look like it belongs, the base does not have the age or wear you would expect from an OLD piece
Comments: It is my mother's Kota, she bought it at a Christies Amsterdam auction, and it goes with the documentation from the Morfeld family who
collected it around 1910-1919
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 19 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 20 Copy = 16 Undecided = 12 |
| Property from the Estate of George Schwelinger A magnificent Bakota reliquary guardian figure rising from a diamond-shaped body pierced through at the center leading to an elongated cylindrical neck, the spade-shaped head with square nose and circular discs with inset bone on either side beneath a bulbous, forehead framed by a flange flaring at each side, the whole covered with strips of brass with a cut-out diamond pattern on the flange; fine aged patina. height 14 3/4 in. (37.5cm) Provenance: Merton Simpson, New York Arnold Maremont, Chicago Acquired from The Donald Morris Gallery, Detroit. October 3, 1974 Published: Cranfarook Academy of Art, Icon and Symbol, 1975: figure 40 Perrois, Arts du Gabon, 1979: figure 163. Chaffin and Chaffin, L'Art KOTA 1980:97 and color plate: 325. Exhibited: Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, Icon and Symbol, Cranbrook Academy of Art, May 30 - July 20, 1975 According to Chaffin andChaffin this particular figure belongs to a "homogeneous group that can be considered as a school of either pure Shamaye style or of a strong Shamaye influence, thus northern Obamba." Typically figures of this style do not have a mouth, nor is there a coiffure. Of this particular piece Chaffin and Chaffin note that the ornamentation on it’s sides (i.e. the flange) is rare (1980: 96-97) Sotheby's Estimate $20,000-30,000 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Very old, nice
Comments: A bit unusual but very very interesting
Comments: I love this piece's form and execution -- enough so that I would not care if it is "authentic" or not. I love the solidity of the metalwork, the
stamped design and the over-all balance of the piece. Whether made for ritual or wholly aesthetic purposes, the piece works.
Comments: Guessing authentic, despite something a little too shiny. Perhaps it was polished by a zealous collector. I like the austere design, the crazy
eyes and the unusual line of losenges on the coiffure.
Comments: The piece appears very shiny if it were to be old, but the style is good for this style of piece. I like it!
Comments: nice piece
Comments: Nice for this style, but there is the distressed wood and the perfect metal AGAIN
Comments: Although I believe the eyes have been 'opened' later by removing the back paint that should be over the brass rings.
Comments: Very old, nice
Comments: A bit unusual but very very interesting
Comments: I love this piece's form and execution -- enough so that I would not care if it is "authentic" or not. I love the solidity of the metalwork, the
stamped design and the over-all balance of the piece. Whether made for ritual or wholly aesthetic purposes, the piece works.
Comments: Guessing authentic, despite something a little too shiny. Perhaps it was polished by a zealous collector. I like the austere design, the crazy
eyes and the unusual line of losenges on the coiffure.
Comments: The piece appears very shiny if it were to be old, but the style is good for this style of piece. I like it!
Comments: nice piece
Comments: Nice for this style, but there is the distressed wood and the perfect metal AGAIN
Comments: Although I believe the eyes have been 'opened' later by removing the back paint that should be over the brass rings.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 20 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 24 Copy = 16 Undecided = 8 |
| Property of Douglas S Cramer, Los Angeles An Important Bakota .Reliquary Guardian Figure, the diamond shaped lozenge leading to a tapering neck beneath a large overall head flanked by rounded flanges and a slender crescent arching above, the face with a grooved mouth and triangular copper covered nose leading to a medial strip and surrounded by almond-shaped metal eyes beneath a ridged brow, the flanges with tine and intricate filagree work, the whole covered with brass attached to the surface with tacks, an old repair on the left flange, the reverse carved with a single strip, an old label on the back reading 3633; fine aged, patina. Height 26 1/4 in. (66.7 cm.) Provenance: Mert Simpson, New York Harry Franklin, Los Angeles Sotheby's estimate $35,000-50,000 Bought $36,800 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Old and nice
Comments: almost too god to be true
Comments: This is another beautiful object. I see no clues as to authenticity beyond the extreme care and precision of the metalwork, which I find very
pleasing. This beautiful object doesn't show age but has been allocated so much labor and resources (metal, tacks, etc.) that it seems possibly authentic
but maintains its aesthetic and artistic integrity regardless of ritual or purely aesthetic motivation. if not "real," this is certainly a fine homage to the form.
Comments: troubling, the byzantine look. Perhaps the photography has made it look flashier than it really is. There are some very eccentric figures around,
I suppose this is one of them...
Comments: Wow, it's hard to tell on this piece, it's so flashy and decorative and shiny. The tacks look out of place. I would almost say a recent copy?
Comments: this ones a beauty
Comments: the quite atypical type but genuine
Comments: More detail than I've seen on any figure before. Just looks newer and "made to impress"
Comments: The wood has neither worn enough nor in the 'right' places
Comments: Old and nice
Comments: almost too god to be true
Comments: This is another beautiful object. I see no clues as to authenticity beyond the extreme care and precision of the metalwork, which I find very
pleasing. This beautiful object doesn't show age but has been allocated so much labor and resources (metal, tacks, etc.) that it seems possibly authentic
but maintains its aesthetic and artistic integrity regardless of ritual or purely aesthetic motivation. if not "real," this is certainly a fine homage to the form.
Comments: troubling, the byzantine look. Perhaps the photography has made it look flashier than it really is. There are some very eccentric figures around,
I suppose this is one of them...
Comments: Wow, it's hard to tell on this piece, it's so flashy and decorative and shiny. The tacks look out of place. I would almost say a recent copy?
Comments: this ones a beauty
Comments: the quite atypical type but genuine
Comments: More detail than I've seen on any figure before. Just looks newer and "made to impress"
Comments: The wood has neither worn enough nor in the 'right' places
| blackout picture |
| One of the original pictures |
| FIGURE # 21 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 28 Copy = 4 Undecided = 16 |
| This piece comes from a private collection in France The owner wishes to remain anonymous but I am very happy that they wanted to share this piece with me and the group for this exercise. I find this piece to be fascinating and mysterious! |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Nice, unusual style, very old
Comments: mixed feelings, part of it appears to be genuine, but then the wood does not fit
Comments: Clearly, this piece shows signs of aging on the wood base. But the metal is also deteriorated to an extent that elicits curiosity regarding the
probability that a ritually significant object would be so mishandled and mistreated as to allow such damage. Termites and other insects destroy wood.
What has eroded this metal to this extent? I still love its aged appearance and the apparent age even of the nails that have been introduced to stabilize
the applied metal. But the further aging of these nails makes me question whether it is well aged naturally or intentionally.
Comments: Interesting! Ivory eyes. If the metal is as old as it looks, how come the wood is only partially eroded? Could the metal have been recuperated
from an older piece and "recycled" on a new wooden support? Nice.
Comments: Old nails, old metal, old wood. There is an undeniable old quality about this piece that I really like compared to ALL others. Authentic
Comments: if this one is a copy complements to the artist!
Comments: Clear fake type, wrong aspect and shape
Comments: look at the beautiful handmade nails
Comments: This piece fascinates and intrigues me. The metal is undeniably old and the wood appears to have a lot of age as well. There is a mystery
about this piece that I can not put my finger on and it's not that I think it is a copy at all, in fact I think it might be one of the oldest examples here, at least
the metal is. It has the age that you would expect for these figures, not the shiny and polished barbie dolls.
Comments: Nice, unusual style, very old
Comments: mixed feelings, part of it appears to be genuine, but then the wood does not fit
Comments: Clearly, this piece shows signs of aging on the wood base. But the metal is also deteriorated to an extent that elicits curiosity regarding the
probability that a ritually significant object would be so mishandled and mistreated as to allow such damage. Termites and other insects destroy wood.
What has eroded this metal to this extent? I still love its aged appearance and the apparent age even of the nails that have been introduced to stabilize
the applied metal. But the further aging of these nails makes me question whether it is well aged naturally or intentionally.
Comments: Interesting! Ivory eyes. If the metal is as old as it looks, how come the wood is only partially eroded? Could the metal have been recuperated
from an older piece and "recycled" on a new wooden support? Nice.
Comments: Old nails, old metal, old wood. There is an undeniable old quality about this piece that I really like compared to ALL others. Authentic
Comments: if this one is a copy complements to the artist!
Comments: Clear fake type, wrong aspect and shape
Comments: look at the beautiful handmade nails
Comments: This piece fascinates and intrigues me. The metal is undeniably old and the wood appears to have a lot of age as well. There is a mystery
about this piece that I can not put my finger on and it's not that I think it is a copy at all, in fact I think it might be one of the oldest examples here, at least
the metal is. It has the age that you would expect for these figures, not the shiny and polished barbie dolls.
| blackout picture |
| Original picture |
| FIGURE # 22 |
| Double Click on the figure to see full size higher resolution image. Results: Authentic = 20 Copy = 16 Undecided = 12 |
| Property from the Mr. and Mrs. Klaus G. Perls Collection Tribal Art Height 22 1/4" Provenance: Curt Valentin, Buchholz Gallery, New York, 1951 Sotheby's estimate $20,000 - $30,000 |
General comments from the participants:
Comments: Old and nice
Comments: sweet
Comments: Nothing about this piece particularly moves me. It is not particularly fine, beautiful or evocative.
Comments: Might be authentic, but for me this work lacks class. Its lines contradict each other and the expression has none of the fixed serenity of the best
Kota figures. But that is a personal reaction. Top-heavy. And the lighting is harsh, creating a certain vulgarity...
Comments: The base does not appear to have the age you might expect for this type of figure if it were authentic. The style is good though but it's a little
sloppy. Undecided
Comments: crude but feels old
Comments: Atypical but genuine for me
Comments: Again the strange facial style and poor style in my opinion.
Comments: Old and nice
Comments: sweet
Comments: Nothing about this piece particularly moves me. It is not particularly fine, beautiful or evocative.
Comments: Might be authentic, but for me this work lacks class. Its lines contradict each other and the expression has none of the fixed serenity of the best
Kota figures. But that is a personal reaction. Top-heavy. And the lighting is harsh, creating a certain vulgarity...
Comments: The base does not appear to have the age you might expect for this type of figure if it were authentic. The style is good though but it's a little
sloppy. Undecided
Comments: crude but feels old
Comments: Atypical but genuine for me
Comments: Again the strange facial style and poor style in my opinion.
| If you want to go to the original Kota "You Be the Judge" page it is linked through my Educational Resources page. The RESULTS page is also linked there. |
| Rand African Art home page Return to the Educational Resources page Click here to see the Kota figures in the Arman Collection |
| You are visitor # |
| Need to view this page in a different language? Just click on a flag below to automatically translate this page. |
| h=59.7cm Another Property, 1984 Property from the Estate of Anthony Chen, 1996 Auction(s): Sotheby's-New York, 29.11.1984. Lot 308, illus. Bought $4400 Sotheby's-New York, 08.05.1996. Lot 110, color illus. Estimate $8,000 - $12,000 Bought $7475 |
| h=64.1cm Collected before 1940 (info Loudmer, 1983) Property from a European Collector, 1999 Auction(s): Loudmer-Paris, 31.05.1983. Lot 107, color illus. Bought FF 60000 Sotheby's-New York, 19.11.1999. Lot 276, color illus. Unsold, Est. $15/20k |