Featured Good Afternoon! I hope everyone is having a great day!! Can You Please Tell Me If This Mark is Zuni

Hi everyone! There seem to be some confusion about this makers mark. I have seen these listing with the same mark and some have it listed as Navajo and other as Zuni. There is also confusion as to the name of the maker. Any information you can give me would be greatly appreciated. Thank you and enjoy your afternoon/Evening

@i need help
@Any Jewelry

Ebay
https://www.ebay.com/itm/122092450531

Etsy
https://www.etsy.com/listing/993596...rch_query=hb+jewelry&ref=sr_gallery-1-7&frs=1

 

looks very similar to me

 

All I can tell you, is that petit point jewelry is a style which was credited to, and created by, Zuni jewelry makers, dating back to the 1920s.

And since then, it has been copied by other Native American tribes, non-Native American craftspeople, and by factories operating in the Philippines, China, and probably elsewhere.

The copies are certainly not limited to petit point jewelry, but the uniform sizes and patterns of this style, do make it easy for forgeries to be made.

Whenever you see the exact same ring or bracelet, or even the same setting with slightly different color of stones, it is cause for questioning, and likely means the piece is a copy or fake.

I have been unable to find this stamp in any of the reputable references, in print or on line. This is also reason to doubt the authenticity. (Keep in mind, I'm referring to "reputable references," not just examples of listings on web sites, of which there may be hundreds, thanks to those who do their "researching" on line!)

 

Thank You Taupou!

 

I understand that you didn’t ask for my opinion but my opinion is a bit different than Taupou’s. I have no clue who made your bracelet either and agree that it is not showing up in any of the reputable sources that I own but as I’ve stated on similar threads, I don’t think it matters. It’s a nice decorative piece and is not trying to be much more than that. It cannot be legally sold in the US as Native American, Indian etc. nor can it be given any tribal affiliation but IMO there is no issue in selling it in silver (and turquoise) jewelry (assuming that it does test as sterling and is turquoise which it appears to be) as Southwestern Sterling Turquoise Silver Petit Point Cuff Bracelet Snake Eye Center Signed HB whatever. Regardless of the maker it’s done in a southwestern style and will appeal to someone if priced competitively. I know that many love to research until the cows come home but not all pieces warrant that kind of research.

 

Pretty bracelet ezee, but this particular HB is not in any of my sources either. Reader gave you the perfect listing terms though.

 

As someone that loves American Indian jewelry, taupou is correct. Though as reader stated, I am not nearly as rigid. This is simply my opinion, so take it as such....

The signer is known, but is "Unknown". That does not mean they were not American Indian, it means they have not yet been recognized by a tribe or the name is unknown to any tribe. The modern system of tracking artisans was not always in place, and it is not uncommon for older pieces to be unsigned and unmarked or for the signers to be unknown. Or, using this example, signed but unknown. You will note in tribal work, it is not uncommon to see generational craftsman and it would be difficult to track a one generation branch that died out.

As I tell everyone, if care is not taken, your family history will be lost in 2 generations. Just this past week I sold a ring from circa 1880 to the relative of the man that owned the company. Even after decades and writing a book about the company, they had no idea the family jewelry business had a company makers mark until they found the ring I had for sale.

Hence, why I am not a signature snob. The law referenced was not passed until 1990 and was not just intended for jewelry. Since the passing of this law, the signing of pieces and tracking registered artisans has become crucial to the various members of tribes involved in profiting from the American Indian commercial enterprises. (Good for them by the way!)

An unsigned piece like this, simply marked sterling, will bring basically the same amount as a piece that is signed, but an unknown signer. The rub on signed pieces like this is, nobody can prove either way as to origin outside of the style and quality of the work and the stones used in the setting(s). Using the law as a sledgehammer can in fact result in the massive loss of American Indian heritage as pieces get scrapped/repurposed, thrown away etc because the "artisan" is not known or recognized at a given moment in time. Care should ALWAYS be used to preserve history and when in doubt, attribution should be made based upon age, quality and materials and NOT just assumed to be a reproduction/fake.

Seeing examples of this artisans work was helpful. Without holding them in my hands, visually the work is on par with known Navajo artisans and the turquoise stones mounted are just lovely, though again, without deeper inspection, it is assumed they are undyed.

Yes, you will see the same design used multiple times, especially on more complex pieces. Various types of castings are used over and over for items produced for "commercial" sale from ring bands, to cuff bands, etc. It is not uncommon to see the same design and style by the same American Indian artisan with very slight nuanced differences - the most important are stone color, stone shape, turquoise mine source, and matrix variation as examples. Pieces are hand worked to create the finished product making each piece slightly unique. The bezel set is the most common setting because it is easy to shape around the stone(s) chosen for the project. Stone quality is almost always high, and are hand chosen for the particular piece.

It is unreasonable to expect an artisan to spend the time to create a castings, work metal, choose stones all to produce a one off cuff bracelet sold for a few hundred dollars.

Regardless, the better crafted the piece (marrying stones to metal) the more rare it is for a stone to become loose or ill fitted over time. Jewelry made by American Indians tends to be "tight" using time honored traditions. Shoddy workmanship and stones that fall out is the type of thing you see out of reproductions.

At the end of the day, call it southwestern in the style of Native American....Do not attribute it to a tribe, test to ensure it is sterling, and price accordingly. It is a solid, petite, piece. If I had it in stock, I would have no reservations about offering it for sale.

 

I agree with you except for one statement. IF ezeepass is selling it on the internet in the US (I can only speak for US law) they must not state that the bracelet is “in the style of Native American”. That is keyword spam and with US NA protective law could result in a fine beside just a listing takedown. SOUTHWESTERN is the “cough cough” term that everyone I know uses to list and to search Indian jewelry that cannot be definitely ID’d.

Is there a possibility that the piece is Asian made? I guess, but what difference does it make? It’s a minor tourist decorative piece that isn’t going to bring a ton even if signed with tribal affiliation. It also appears well made to me and I too think it is what it appears to be.

 

I understand Reader. There is a reason I did not use Native American in my post. Anyone born in America is a Native American. It is not cultural appropriation except by American Indians who believe they are, and only they can be, Native Americans.

The U.S. .Gov folks have not come to a place yet where they are willing to recognized the claims of the American Indian tribes as being the only ones with the right to be "Native American". If they did, we could be required to return all lands, rights, wealth etc and all other people in this country, well, might no longer be American, rather we could all just be illegal immigrants. Now that would be a bummer.

You will note nowhere in any of the definitions of the statute is the term Native American used. Frankly, as someone born in the states, I whole heartedly believe I could create my own jewelry line and call it, by birthright, Native American made.

Even the American Indian tribes did not originate in America, rather, they migrated here, so they are really not Native Americans, they just happen to migrate here first.

Given this....I contend the use of Native American is perfectly acceptable. The use of American Indian or inappropriately associating a tribal affiliation of an unrecognized artisan, would not be considered acceptable. The confusion is self inflicted by the tribes because, for some reason, American Indians still insist they are the only Native Americans in this country.

It creates quite a gray area unfortunately because - the U.S. cannot recognize the tribes as having exclusive claim to being the only Native American. They are however, American Indians, and by recognized Indian nation, whatever Tribal Affiliation they were born into.

Here is what the U.S. Dept of Interior states in regards to the statute;
"The Indian Arts and Crafts Act (Act) of 1990 (P.L. 101-644) is a truth-in-advertising law that prohibits misrepresentation in the marketing of Indian art and craft products within the United States. It is illegal to offer or display for sale, or sell any art or craft product in a manner that falsely suggests it is Indian produced, an Indian product, or the product of a particular Indian or Indian tribe or Indian arts and crafts organization, resident within the United States. For a first time violation of the Act, an individual can face civil or criminal penalties up to a $250,000 fine or a 5-year prison term, or both. If a business violates the Act, it can face civil penalties or can be prosecuted and fined up to $1,000,000.

Under the Act, an Indian is defined as a member of any federally or officially State recognized tribe of the United States, or an individual certified as an Indian artisan by an Indian tribe."

and for relevance to this topic:
"For example, products sold using a sign claiming "Indian Jewelry" would be a violation of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act if the jewelry was produced by someone other than a member, or certified Indian artisan, of an Indian tribe. Products advertised as "Navajo Jewelry" would be in violation of the Act if they were produced by someone who is not a member, or certified Indian artisan, of the Navajo tribe."

Given how much jewelry India imports into the U.S., I am not sure how they feel about being excluded from Indian Jewelry....lol

Regardless, as stated, it is a gray area with the use of Native American, but one I am pretty certain traditionally would not really be enforceable in court and why the term is not used in the statutes. It is assumed to encompass, but IMHO, it goes back to the club problem and the amount of real American Indian products produced before the date. I think if you were clearly selling knock offs, you'd get a cease and desist letter from .gov. If selling in good faith...not so much.

Granted, .gov has been doing an awful lot of crazy stuff the last 20 years, so anything is possible so use Native American at your own risk. I choose to apply it to pieces I feel good about...

 

George-I agree with you HOWEVER my interactions on this board are strictly aimed at trying to help others many of whom are internet sellers and probably use ebay and similar sites. You can certainly argue semantics all day long but the bottom line is that we should never encourage anyone who may list an item on ebay to use terms like “in the style of Native American.” That is keyword spam and reportable as the item will come up in Native American searches. What you do with your own items is your choice but we should never encourage language usage that could hurt another. I’m not defending ebay’s crazy rules but it is important that all sellers know them. Sorry but that’s absolutely against ebay policy. No clue if ezeepass is an ebay reseller but assuming they could be I felt it was important to comment. They could use that phrase and slide by or they could be reported. Hardly worth the chance.

 

When you look at origins, just about no one on earth is native anything. People originated in one place, migrated to other places due to climate change, invasions, or other circumstances, since the beginning of humankind.

I like the Canadian term 'First Nations' for Native Americans. Although there was at least one earlier migration, it is likely the current First Nations really were the first to build nations, rather than being scattered families.
But of course their origin is largely Asian.

I live in the Netherlands, where no one is 100% native Dutch, in spite of assumptions and claims. Even if you only look at Dutch families after the year 1600, an estimated 98% has foreign ancestors added to the mix. There is even a substantial percentage of Asian and African mixed in over centuries, often without the current generation knowing it, because their relatives have looked 'European' for generations.
I think a person's identity is largely socio-cultural. Unfortunately (perceived) identity is often politicized.

As for Native American jewellery, I have given my opinion on the situation many times. Of course my view is that of an outsider.
The current US legislation denies NA arts their roots, and effectively denies the existence of earlier generations of artists. I know this sounds harsh, but imo, it unintentionally adds to cultural genocide.
A proper hallmarking system is needed. I would be happy if that were introduced for the entire US, just like it is in place in other parts of the world. And I mean real hallmarking, not just using a store-bought 'sterling' or '925' punch on a piece of silver.
But, just looking at the NA situation, why not have a system like the Hopi Arts and Crafts Silvercraft Guild, in short the Hopi Guild. Founded in 1949, with their own registration and marking system. A sensible solution to ensure quality and controlled marking.

 

Thank you all! The Hallmark was found on the http://www.art-amerindien.com/hallmarks

 

I feel like an idiot but I don’t see it. Can you post it for me as I’d like to keep a note. Under H?

 

Please don't feel that way because it is under unknown and yes under H scroll all the way down
http://www.art-amerindien.com/hallmarks/h-indian-native-american-jewelry-marks.htm

 

unfortunately for me I think it is all political

 

TY Now I see it but that’s useless realistically. I only looked at HB stamps that were identified.

 

It’s an attractive piece. Just sell it as i suggested. No need to research it further.

 

ok Thank you and enjoy your weekend