Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Taupou, post: 154110, member: 45&quot;]The square piece is most likely a lid to another pot.&nbsp; It&#039;s probably Santo Domingo, or possibly Jemez.&nbsp; Zia clay is tempered with basalt, which leaves tiny black specks in the clay, and I don&#039;t see any indication of that in the photo.</p><p><br /></p><p>The bowl is more problematic.&nbsp; It appears to be Mexican, a Mata Ortiz pot, which has been altered to make it look like, and be mistaken for, an older Hopi piece.&nbsp; The clay colors are similar, and they are often confused by those unfamiliar with both.&nbsp; Mata Ortiz pots are signed by incising the signature, Hopi pots are signed with the same paint used for the designs, a black vegetal paint made from tansy mustard plants.&nbsp; Mata Ortiz pots are rounded and polished on the bottoms, Hopi pots have flat bottoms.&nbsp; And the design patterns are distinctly different.</p><p><br /></p><p>The layout of the designs on this pot, with triangles and parallel lines within bands, is distinctively Mata Ortiz, not Hopi style.&nbsp; And it looks like the pot has been scratched to obliterate the incised signature that would be on a Mata Ortiz pot.&nbsp; That is not the result of normal wear.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>And finally, those numbers were probably put on to make it appear to be from an &quot;old collection.&quot;&nbsp; But the darker spots in each number sure makes it look like it was done with a felt pen marker.&nbsp; Even in the days when numbers were put on pots (with fine-line black ink, not a felt pen) they wouldn&#039;t have been this large, nor such a long series of numbers.&nbsp; And only a complete idiot would deface a pot like this today.&nbsp; Which isn&#039;t to say there aren&#039;t some out there.&nbsp; But it just wouldn&#039;t be done by a serious collector.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in