Tribal Fertility dolls.

I was hoping to get a little help on these. I was wondering what tribe, area, these might be from? The female has wear on the front and on the back. The male, I have my suspicion that it's not authentic.

 

West Africa, Ivory Coast in style but airport art, in my opinion.

The tribal ones tend to be more 'fertile' shall we say.

 

This is an Akuaba doll, from Ghana. While several tribes traditionally used these, the rounded disc-shaped head identifies this one as Ashanti. All authentic Akuaba dolls are female.

Here's a link to a page with more information, including a bit about the legendary Akua, who is credited with creating the first doll: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/1979.206.75

While they were traditionally worn on the back of women who were expecting, or hoping to be, today they are primarily souvenir items made for the tourist trade.

 

That's some good information. The female was purchased at an estate sale thst mainly had items from the early 1900s to around 1930s.

 

It looks like ones from the early 1900s. This piece also sits unleved I don't know if that helps.

 

Worth a ton of money if they were from the early 1900's...........

I'm just not seeing that here though...

 

Here are a couple more pictures of the Akuaba doll. This has wear on it. In one pic, you can see how one "fertile" part is quite worn down compared to the other side. To me, this wear appears to be done by continued use. There's also wear on the face, especially on the higher surfaces. The wear appears to be worn down, meeting flush with the face itself. To me, this doesn't look intentional. I'm not questioning your opinions but just stating what I see. There's also a worm hole on the base.

 

If this forum had a "Discretion Award" Afantiques would win it for sure for that bit of information.

 

I think someone is seeing something more than intended. To repeat, all Akuaba dolls are female figures. There is no such thing as a male Akuaba doll.

 

If you're referring to me, I'm not stating that both of these are female figures.

 

Right. They are both Akuaba dolls. So they both have to be female.

 

One is a female, which would be an Akuaba doll.

I'm lost in your statement. You just stated they are BOTH Akuaba dolls. Then you also stated that an Akuaba doll must be female. How can these both be Akuaba dolls when one is obviously a male?

I'm just trying to understand.

 

My point is, you are seeing something else than what is there. Neither one is "obviously male."
I don't know what you are seeing. I'm not seeing anything in the photos other than two Akuaba dolls, which may or may not be old, and/or "authentic."

Maybe you're seeing a belly button. Navels are often a prominent feature of female fertility figures, being the direct symbolic contact between mother and child.

If this were a male fertility figure, it would feature an "obviously male" part, enlarged to the point we wouldn't be having this discussion!

These are both female figures. Both are Akuaba dolls, which by definition are female fertility figures.

 

Gotcha! I was thinking that the doll on the right might be a male. But that's possibly an extension of a belly button? Did not know that.