Featured Vizagapatam box, the same maker as the one in the Queens collection?

I recently bought a Vizagapatam box with a unusual crest on the top of two loins holding a cartouche, the pierced ivory was about the best I've seen but unfortunately the box is in quite damaged condition As usual I went looking for another to do my research to find out as much as I can about the item but failed to find another like it until a few days later I was looking through the V&A's collection and there was the same loins on a Vizagapatam Palanquin (a sort of sedan chair) I'm sure the loins are a sort of makers mark, what do other members think? I see the Queens Vizagapatam is as damaged as mine, you would think she would have the money to get it fixed lol
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O471151/palanquin-chandrayya-sivakoti/

 

That is beautiful, raver!
Pity the maker didn't sign it, it could be the same one. Not only was this Sivakoti Chandrayya a master carver, but he could read and write English at a time when many people in Britain couldn't.

By the way, I was looking for the loins holding the cartouche. Couldn't find them, but those lions are doing a great job. I contemplated adding something about the possibility of the maker's mark, but decided to keep it in good taste.

In India, as in Europe, lions are a symbol of royalty. If it is the same maker, he was employed by the Maharaja. The box could have been made for use in the palace or to be given by the Maharaja to a loyal subject.

 

Thank you, what's very interesting is how this sort of wear is being perceived in the antique market today. In the last few years we have seen it rise in price but if this level of work was European it would be fetching 20-30x what it reaches today. I still think buying well made antique Indian objects is a really good investment as well as you get to admire the fantastic craftsmanship. Any, I'm sure I messed up somewhere about the "the loins holding the cartouche" please explain as I can't see my mistake lol

 

It certainly would.

It is amazing, I love it.

We all get that sometimes, there are some things you keep missing, no matter how often you read it. Maybe it helps if you read it here:

 

Raver, do you know anything about non-colonial Indian antiques? I have a little woodcarving which was collected in Java in the 1930s, but I suspect it is from NW India, 19th century, maybe even 18th.

 

Please post a picture and I will see if I know, most of the crafts I collect originate from before colonial times, it's only because their heyday was in colonial times that's the date most of my stuff comes from that time. Interestingly before colonial times there was very few people who could afford to pay a very skilled craftsman 3-6 months wages (the amount of time these pieces took to make) so very few were made but the items that were made were spectacular.

 

Here it is, a little carving of Kartikeya/Murugan/Skanda, son of Shiva. He is seated on his mount the peacock, and holds the kel, a weapon with which he can defeat the enemies of the Gods.
It looks like it was once part of a bigger panel, maybe it is the only part that was still presentable when the panel had to be replaced. The peacock has lost part of it's head in the process, I think.
It is ca 13 cm high, found in Java in the 1930s, but I think it is from NW India.

 

Lions not loins, but it's a small error. What a lovely item!

 

There is no doubt it's very old, maybe 17th but no later than 18th c, I don't think it was any larger than the missing bottom right hand corner as there is no variation between the patina from the front to the sides. What would you say the wood is? maybe rosewood? It's wonderful, I don't have a clue as to value as this sort of carving is something I know little about, I'm more boxes that are easier to date but going on the detail and look of the patina I would suggest finding a expert on 17th c Indian carving. Don't be put off by the damage or the size sometimes these things can go for silly money as long as you do the research. I used to watch a UK TV program called Lovejoy about an antique dealer, 98% of the profit he made was down to the research of the item.

 

Now I see lol even when it was pointed out to me I still couldn't see it, I'm getting old

 

Wonderful, thanks for your insight.
I was thinking it could be older than 18th, but wasn't sure. If it were European it would be 17th century, but I have no idea what the Indian climate does to wood. You have more experience with that.
I don't know the kind of wood, it is extremely hard.
I didn't pay much, bought it because I am researching the role the figure of Kartikeya plays in keris symbolism, for a book I am writing. I always like to have something related to the subject around for inspiration. I knew he would be worth much more than I paid for him, otherwise I wouldn't have bought him, I'm Dutch.
I love the little guy. He now has pride of place in front of a keris stand holding our royal house protector keris.

 

The Netherlands had a lot to do with India in the earlier days from 1605 onward so it may well be a early piece, what country did you buy it in? I have many wooden items and only one looks as old as your carving and I think that is 17th c maybe early 18th c, if you take it to someone who deals in 17th c articles they will be able to date it just from the patina.

 

BTW I was watching a Vizagapatam box on ebay today, it made £721 and didn't reach the reserve, it was a good one, perhaps they are beginning to be recognized for the fantastic works of art?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LG-Amazi...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

 

I got it from a seller in Friesland, the north of the Netherlands. Friesland has always had strong ties with the VOC, Dutch East India Company, and houses the VOC archives.
I regularly buy Indonesian antiques from this seller, and bought this little Kartikeya along with an 18th century keris that is related to the royal court of my Indonesian ancestors. The two items were not together originally, I just got a better deal because I bought the two.
In the 17th century the VOC sent craftsmen from their Indian colonies to Java, to make silver and furniture alongside Javanese and Dutch craftsmen. The result was a wonderful cross-cultural Javanese/Indian/Dutch style. A 17th century Indian craftsman could have taken the Kartikeya with him, or even carved it for himself in Java, where it was found in the 1930s.

 

Gorgeous box. It is right that these treasures are recognized, but a pity for you, because they are getting more expensive.

 

It would be a nightmare if not for the fact that most go unrecognized in auctions and on ebay. One day they will all be spotted then I'll have to find something else I like but for shear skill and fine materials Indian and Middle East workmanship can't be beaten even the Italian renaissance period didn't produce such fine work.

 

This piece looks good no matter the size. I think it should be 17th or early 18th century piece and should be more of Indonesian than Indian from the presentation. I think the missing part shouldn't be that much since it looks like a small replica or figurine. U tried to check on the history or did you get any valuation done on this?

 

Thank you for your insights, Benhard.

The only thing the seller knew about the history was that the former owners found it in Java in the 1930s. I don't know if 'found' means bought or excavated. The latter seems to be unlikely, I don't see any evidence that it was ever in soil. It looks like he was handled and loved over a very long time.

Javanese culture, especially 'high' culture, is strongly influenced by Indian culture.
This Kartikeya is wearing a prince's crown, this type was worn in parts of India and in parts of Indonesia, including Java.
It looks to me like he is wearing a dhoti, an Indian garment. It is a piece of textile, wrapped around the lower body, the end of which is pulled up between the legs and fastened at the back.
The slanted lines on his legs are like the folds of a dhoti.
Javanese sculptures of deities from the Hindu era are depicted wearing clothing of the Javanese nobility.
Dhotis were not worn by Javanese nobles, they would wear either a long kain (sarong), or a dodod, a very big piece of textile of about 4x6 metres, intricately folded, and gathered in a bustle at the back. Sometimes the dodod was worn over a kain or trousers.
It was mainly the clothing that led me to believe the little guy was of Indian origin.

I will be keeping him for now, I love him, and it helps having him around for inspiration for my book.
I haven't had a valuation done, but thinking of sending some photos to a museum or auction house. Does anyone have any idea who best to send them to?

 

I think a museum would be best, I often see auction houses get these things wrong, The V&A might be able to help

 

Thanks raver.
The V&A are swamped with requests though, I asked them about my antique kohl bottle in july, and am still waiting for an answer. This is the bottle, even more antique now:
https://www.antiquers.com/threads/any-idea-of-the-age-of-my-bronze-kohl-bottle.18780/#post-255597