Pre-contact Maori whalebone club

[Ron Anderson]

This is a club from a very esteemed collection that went up for auction. Hopefully this means its a good piece. It certainly has providence.

It is unlike any other Maori clubs I know of. Does not conform to the standard types I know. But then I have come across references of clubs that don't.

It is whalebone, and it is old. Very old. I think it is pre-contact.

But I'm anxious to hear what other people think.

This sort of thing is extremely unusual.

It owes me a fair bit of money.

The collection it came from included some of the rarest artefacts I have ever seen – human heads from Borneo, exquisite two metre Benin ivory walking sticks, African ivory war horns, and carved ivory pieces from China that went for tens of thousands of dollars.

[Gavin Nugent]

Hi Ron,

I too would be interested in hearing more about this from learned members.
Personally, I do not think this is pre-contact Maori though, my opinion only based on the manner of carving and only seeing an image, I would look to other Islands. Carving aside, the whale bone however does seem to have a lot of age to it and whale bone doesn't come cheap in any form.

PM me if you like as I know a bit more about a number of the items from GES.

Gav

[Tim Simmons]

That is very nice indeed. The head is beautifully carved, look at the fine work around the nose. Ron in my opinion this is not Maori or pre contact, as the circle design elements are made with a pair of steel dividers. I think what you have may well be a genuine North American NW Coast piece. You are a very lucky man!!!!!

[VANDOO]

I AGREE THAT THIS CLUB MORE CLOSELY RESEMBLES THE WHALEBONE CLUBS FOUND IN THE NORTH WEST COAST OF NORTH AMERICA. THEY ARE GENERALLY A LITTLE LONGER THAN THE MAORI SHORT CLUBS AND YOU SEE VERY FEW OF THEM COMPARED TO THE MAORI CLUBS. WHAT ARE ITS MEASUREMENTS?. SEE THE THREE POSTS ON MAORI SHORT CLUBS FOR PICTURES AND INFO ON MAORI CLUBS. IF THE PROVENANCE IS ACCURATE IT IS POSSIBLE TO BE MAORI BUT FROM LOOKING AT IT AND ITS APPARENT LENGTH I WOULD GO WITH N.W. COAST.
I INCLUDE THREE PICTURES OF TWO WHALEBONE WAR CLUBS N.W. COAST AND A PICTURE OF SEVERAL SNOW KNIVES USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WAY UP NORTH.
EITHER WAY YOU HAVE A VERY RARE AND DESIRABLE CLUB, I HAVE NEVER HAD THE PLEASURE OF HANDELING SUCH A CLUB SO CONGRADULATIONS ON ACTUALLY OWNING ONE, I AM ENVIOUS.

[fearn]

I'm also skeptical about a pre-contact age on that club. However, I think it came from the south Pacific, not the Pacific Northwest.

Here's my reasoning:

1. Pre-Contact vs. Post-Contact: The carving looks like it was done with metal tools. Granted, I haven't done any carving on whale bone (for the obvious reason of not having any), but Pre-Contact lines would have been ground and chipped in with stone tools. This tends to make for round bottoms and smooth edges. If you can imagine free-handing those circular incisions using (perhaps) a stick and some sand, or an awl made from something, then you'll see what the issue is. With a metal drill, it's a trivial figure to make. Ditto with the edges around the mouth. Now, if you can see work marks that makes you think someone laboriously incised all that stuff, then Pre-Contact looks more likely.

2. South Pacific vs. North Pacific: to me, it looks like Polynesian work. My thought is that in the early days, a number of Polynesians, including Maori, served on the whaling boats. I could see such a sailor making this club on-board or afterward, using some bone from one of their catches.

That's my 0.0002 pence,

F

[Tim Simmons]

Hmmm, back on the made by saliors. From your pictures I cannot see much smoothness from handling. That does not have to mean much. I can see the carving of the face fitting many NW pacific masks. I could see melanesian style carving but the form of the whole thing and the overall shape of the handle part do seem so very similar to many NW Pacific pieces. I think you sould send pics to museums in London and Washington DC.

P.S. I have to say that the quality of the carving suggests a specialist or an artist, at the very least somebody accomplished and used to balancing design.

[Spunjer]

It reminds me of Ku or Kukailimoku, Hawaiian war god...

[Tim Simmons]

Ku has a fierce mouth?

This really is something to get stuck into. These pictures which are very helpful in showing Hawaiian sculpture outside of the really flashy museum pieces in so many standard publications. The pictures are from "Old Hawai'i. an ethnography of Hawai'i in the 1880s - ethnologisches museum Staatliche Museen zu Berlin 2007" Cleary the whale bone club is not Hawaiian work. Do not see it as other polynesian work either. An exception is Fiji which is equally melanesia. I could add more pictures of decorative sculpture all strongly hawaiian and far away from the work on the club.

The figure standing on the ring like object is an armband.

[Ron Anderson]

Thanks for your responses, everyone.

Sorry to get back so late, but the time difference means I sleep while you work, and vice versa.

I'll take measurements of the item and post them, hopefully today.

I agree it isn't likely to be Maori but I really don't want to infuse the debate with my quite uninformed conjectures. I was surprised by the NW America connection but the form of the club is quite strikingly similar to those examples. All I can say is my club is better artwork than those shown here. However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if you are right Tim.

The collection it came from included a lot of stuff from NW America, predominantly innuit. Some amazing fossik, walrus ivory sculpture and implements. Same truly outstanding stuff.

So that is entirely possible.

For me, this thing resembles the Easter Island heads, which may mean nothing.

It's worth noting when handing this club that it feels well balanced. It is weighty and substantial.

The collection it came from really was an exceptional collection of ethnographic artefacts. It came from an American - Lillian Hoffman who lived in Australia. Famously eccentric collector with a philanthropic bent who was planning on setting up a museum at one point to house her collection> It seems she collected from around the world.

I don't think this came from a sailor because she was in the habit of buying artefacts, sometimes at high prices, with the intention of preserving the cultures she was buying from, and supporting the arts in those cultures. She was conspicuously wealthy.

The auctioneer didn't know much about the club and called it Maori. I'm fairly certain he was unsure about the item. The age of it of course was indisputable. It kind of looked Maori. And it was one of hundreds of items he had to identify after her death.

We had a chat. He didn't know what the club was. But I think it's an exceptional one, whatever it is. I think this is an authentic piece of something.

[VANDOO]

I HAD MISPLACED SOME PICTURES OF THESE CLUBS BUT FOUND THEM IN A OLD POST BY RUEL 7/21/2004 "ETHNO WEAPONS IN SCOTLAND PART 2" THE CLUB UNDER GLASS IN THE DISPLAY TABLE IS FROM THE HUNTERIAN MUSEUM GLASGOW UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, TAKEN BY RUEL. THE OTHERS ARE ONES FROM AN OLD BOOK AND SOME WERE COLLECTED BY CAPTIAN COOK SO THEY DO GO BACK BEFORE RECORDED HISTORY ON THE N.W. COAST OF NORTH AMERICA.

[Ron Anderson]

Hi Vandoo

Thanks, that's extremely helpful.

I am strongly convinced of the case that this is a North West American, Nootka Sounds or somesuch, piece. Very old.

Look at the second club in the second picture you're just sent. Note the concentric circles that mirror the ones on my club.

I must say, it's a surprise. But I can't say I'm unhappy with that outcome. Though I'm still looking for some good Maori clubs.

I have to say, I had doubts all along about this being Maori.

The other thing strongly indicating its origins is the fact that there were so many other NW American items on auction. There were no Maori items, and the only other clubs were 3 Fijian wooden clubs. And I bought those too.

I'd like to ask this question: are you sure these were cut by metal tools? I have marine ivory tools, innuit, from this region (bought at the same auction incidentally) that I'm pretty sure could do this job just as precisely as metal tools. These are strong, hardy, precise instruments. In fact, in that part of the world marine ivory frequently replaced metal in kitchen utensils and the like. And I think still does to some extent. The tools I have include bow drills and other such tools, entirely made out of walrus ivory, and they are very, very strong indeed.

Will post pictures of these tools soon.

Regards
Ron

[VANDOO]

I SEE NO REASON IRON TOOLS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO CARVE THESE WHALE BONE CLUBS. THE N.W. COAST AND IN NEW ZEALAND BOTH HAVE PLENTY OF GOOD STONE AVAILABLE FOR CARVING AND THERE ARE MANY VERY WELL CARVED PICES OF ART THAT ARE ALL PRECONTACT. THE ONES BROUGHT BACK BY CAPTIAN COOK WERE ALL PRECONTACT EXAMPLES. UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T HAVE THE BOOK AND ONLY THE PICTURES SO CAN'T POINT OUT WHICH EXAMPLES WERE COOK'S. THEY MAKE SOME REMARKABLE IVORY CARVINGS AND TOOLS USING STONE TOOLS AND IVORY IS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO WORK THAN BONE. THE CLUB YOU HAVE MAY HAVE LAIN BURRIED AT AN OLD CAMP JUDGING FROM THE PICTURES OF THE PATINA.
THE LOW ISLANDS WHERE GOOD MATERIALS ESPECIALLY GOOD HARD STONE WERE LIMITED TO SHELL, BONE, TEETH, WOOD AND SHARKSKIN. THEIR ART WAS LIMITED BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF MATERIALS AND GOOD TOOLS. OFTEN THEIR ART CHANGED AND BECAME BETTER AND MORE COMMON AFTER THE ARRIVAL OF STEEL TOOLS. MANY LIMITATIONS WERE REMOVED, AS THEIR TOOLS HAD BEEN SO POOR AND LABOR INTENSIVE. NEW TECKNIQUES DEVELOPED AS A RESULT OF THE BETTER TOOLS AND THE COMPARATIVE EASE OF CARVING AS WELL AS THE ABILITY TO DO THINGS THE OLD TOOLS WERE NOT CAPABLE OF. BUT DESPITE IT ALL THEY DID DO SOME REMARKABLE WORKS OF ART BEFORE STEEL.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
Some better photos of the piece in Glasgow University's Hunterian Museum, it is labeled as originating in British Columbia. www.huntsearch.gla.ac.uk/ to search through the collection although not all items have been photographed.
Regards,
Norman.

[fearn]

Since I am a bit of a fan of PNW art, can I point out how many details are MISSING in Ron's club?

In PNW art, the shape of the parts--eyes particularly, also noses, mouths, ears, etc--are all highly meaningful. For example, the example Norman just posted may well represent an anthropomorphic hawk.

Ron's club has none of these details.

Additionally, that round eye that Ron's club show is alien to what I know of Pacific Northwest traditions. Look at all the beautiful examples already posted, and you will see what I mean.

Best,

F

[Ron Anderson]

Hi Fearn

Yes, this doesn't look too anthromorphic, it is clearly a human head. But there's a fine line, isn't there? It's not far from being the kind of head that could be an anthropomorphic eagle or somesuch.

I don't know what to say about that. I don't know enough that region. Of course, if you look at photo 6 in the last picture poster by Vandoo, I'd argue that's pretty much the same thing - a human head. I have doubt that's an animal or anthropomorphic head.

As for they eye, I don't know, I'll keep looking. Some of those eyes in those picures don't look too far off, though admittedly they're not the same.

Best

Ron

[Ron Anderson]

Hi Fearn

Also, look at club 2 on that last picture posted by Vandoo. That is a greater simplicity of form than the other clubs, and far less detail. Much like my club.

There appears to be a fair bit of variation here, as there is in most forms within any cultural style.

All in all, I still think it's strongly likely that the club has been correctly identified as belonging to this region.

Ron

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by fearn

Since I am a bit of a fan of PNW art, can I point out how many details are MISSING in Ron's club?

In PNW art, the shape of the parts--eyes particularly, also noses, mouths, ears, etc--are all highly meaningful. For example, the example Norman just posted may well represent an anthropomorphic hawk.

Ron's club has none of these details.

Additionally, that round eye that Ron's club show is alien to what I know of Pacific Northwest traditions. Look at all the beautiful examples already posted, and you will see what I mean.

Best,

F

Well noted Fearn, at face value I'd tend to agree when viewed side by side with the clear images from elsewhere that are provided but only to a degree based on comparison to the black and white line drawings, they look simpler but you wouldn't find an arguement from me based on your interest in the regions art, I just find these beauties very interesting and not studied myself.

Ron, perhaps if you can provide more detailed, closer and more focused images, parallels in age, stylings and idiosyncrasies of these regions may be more readily identified rather than a broad region approach in ID.

Gav

[VANDOO]

WITH ANY FORM OF CLUB THERE IS A WIDE RANGE IN CRAFTSMANSHIP ESPECIALLY IF EACH WARRIOR IS EXPECTED TO MAKE HIS OWN WEAPONS. STATUS AS WELL AS PERSONEL PREFRENCE ALSO PLAYS A PART SOME PREFER A ORNATE ITEM AND SOME A PLAIN ONE REQUIRING LESS TIME AND WORK TO MAKE. PERHAPS YOUR RANK DETERMINED HOW YOU WERE ALLOWED TO DECORATE YOUR PERSONAL BELONGINGS AS IN MANY OCEANIC SOCIETYS.
THE MAORI OF NEW ZEALAND AND THE TRIBES OF THE NORTH WEST COAST OF AMERICA HAVE MANY SIMULARITYS ONE OF WHICH IS THE USE OF ABALONE AS INLAY IN CARVINGS AND WAR CLUBS. THEIR LIFE STYLE HAS MANY SIMULARITYS ALSO EXCEPT THE MAORI DIDN'T HAVE WAR ARMOR OR TOTUM POLES ALTHOUGH SOME OF THEIR CARVINGS ARE LARGE AND CONTAIN SEVERAL FIGURES.
NORMAN THANKS FOR POSTING BETTER PICTURES OF THAT CLUB AS IT IS AN OUTSTANDING EXAMPLE.

[Ron Anderson]

Certainly, I will endeavour to do that.

It is in storage, along with most of my collection. I am going through there to pick something else up.

However, I think the similarity between the figure on my club and that of club 6 in the last picture provided by Vandoo is signiicant. It can hardly be ignored simply because it's a line drawing and not a photo. Line drawings are all that are preserved of clubs that are long gone.

I will say the photo reflects the poor liht in the storage area so I'm not sure any other photos I post will be much better, but let's see. Certainly, the colour of the patina in the photo is not the same when viewed directly.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by Ron Anderson

Certainly, I will endeavour to do that.

It is in storage, along with most of my collection. I am going through there to pick something else up.

However, I think the similarity between the figure on my club and that of club 6 in the last picture provided by Vandoo is signiicant. It can hardly be ignored simply because it's a line drawing and not a photo. Line drawings are all that are preserved of clubs that are long gone.

I will say the photo reflects the poor liht in the storage area so I'm not sure any other photos I post will be much better, but let's see. Certainly, the colour of the patina in the photo is not the same when viewed directly.

Yes I agree and as Vandoo has noted there is much to keep in mind too. Great to hear I look forward to the images. There are plenty of people here who can offer a hand with photography help and or suggestions.

Gav

[Ron Anderson]

I also wonder if the concentric circles in my club once held moth of pearl inlays that are now gone.

I've googled pictures of early clubs with magnificent mother of pearl inlays up the frame of the club exactly where the concentric of my club line up. (Two examples on exhibit in Edinburgh spring to mind) These inlays were square, but that again is easy to understand in terms of the natural differences in personal artistic styles etc. Is it therefore also possible that there were mother of pearl inlays in the eyes at some point?

Just a thought.

Perhaps close ups will help provide some answers.

[Ron Anderson]

One last note from me before I post the pictures.

Most of these clubs seem to have an eagle or hawk imagine, anthropomorphic, on the hilt. If you look at both the line drawings and the photos they all seem to conform to a head with the shape of an eagle/hawk/bird of prey. There don't seem to be other kinds of animals shown. This I have also read online from other people investigating these clubs. They are predominantly eagle-like heads, with human characteristics.

However, looking at them all you'll see that there are vastly different artistic representations of these bird heads. It seems to me that all these clubs essentially have the same idea to them in depicting a hawk or eagle, but some are more humanlike than others, some are overtly birdlike.

I can certainly see eagle-like characteristics in the head on my club too. Note the pointed nose, very bird like. The eyes too are round and bird like. I would go so far as to say that mine may simply be on the extreme of the more humanoid end of the spectrum of these clubs, while other clubs are on the more birdlike end. Others are in between.

Am I making sense?

[Tim Simmons]

Yes Ron clear as a bell. When I get home I will post masks with the same style of facial features.

[fearn]

Originally Posted by Ron Anderson

I also wonder if the concentric circles in my club once held moth of pearl inlays that are now gone.

I've googled pictures of early clubs with magnificent mother of pearl inlays up the frame of the club exactly where the concentric of my club line up. (Two examples on exhibit in Edinburgh spring to mind) These inlays were square, but that again is easy to understand in terms of the natural differences in personal artistic styles etc. Is it therefore also possible that there were mother of pearl inlays in the eyes at some point?

Just a thought.

Perhaps close ups will help provide some answers.

One thing I don't recall seeing is a perfectly round eye, centered in a circle.

The PNW artisans prefer a rounded lozenge. I don't have the book with me that covers the details, but each pupil shape was supposed to define a particular species. One didn't mix a wolf eye with an eagle nose, for instance. I suspect the tradition arose because they used chisels to make the holes, but regardless, it now is part of the style.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but it's really difficult to make perfect circles by hand, and to me, these look like they were made with a compass and/or a drill bit. Neither technology is Pre-Contact for either the Pacific Northwest or Polynesia. The fact that you've got three such circles that appear to be the same diameter really makes me think that European technology was involved.

Best,

F

[David]

Fearn makes an excellent point. If you examine this closely all the circles appear extremely regular and perfect. It is hard to imagine that these were each done by hand in a pre-contact environment wit stone or ivory tools. To my eye this is obviously an authentic piece, but made after European contact. I would place it amongst the NW clubs though. It shows more similarities than differences to me.

[Robert]

Hello, Though I know absolutely nothing about these clubs I do know that making true circles is a very easy task (something I learned in the Boy Scout years ago) by simply attaching a piece of flint to the side of a round pointed stick, making a small indent to place the point in and and rotating it by rubbing it between your hands just like you're trying to star a fire. The size of the circle just depends on the diameter of the stick you use. If you are real industrious, you can use a bow to turn the stick.


Robert

PS
I forgot to mention, you carve a flat spot on the side of the pointed stick where you are going to mount the piece of flint or what ever sharp item you are going to use.

[Tim Simmons]

Mask same as the handle.

[fearn]

Just for clarification, Robert, are you talking about drilling a hole or drilling a concentric circle?

I agree that drilling a circular hole is easy. Drilling a concentric circle is trickier, because you've got to have a tough, yet hollow bit, and then (most importantly for this piece) you've got to do it three times in a row the same way, and then center a hole in each circle. As I said, this is all tricky. It's even more tricky if it's not part of one's normal artistic repertoire.

What makes me suspicious is that there are three of those concentric circles. If all three are the same size, that's really suspicious, because exactly duplicating the size of such features is a real chore if you're doing it freehand, and there's no particular reason to do it in this design. Conversely, if you have a drill bit with a groove on the outside or anything similar, that's the design you'll get.

F

[Robert]

Hello Fearn, I'm talking about making a concentric circle not drilling a hole. The center hole comes first, then the circle. One way it is done is the way described above and another way is the use of a spool on a shaft with a sharp cutting bit inserted in the spool. Both ways use a center shaft with a point and can be rotated by hand or the use of a bow. Here is a link that might interest you http://www.jstor.org/pss/282168 I just wish that there were pictures to show what I am having a problem describing.

Robert

[VANDOO]

I SUPPOSE THIS DRILL WOULD WORK LIKE A COMPASS WITH A CENTER SPIKE TO MAINTAIN THE CENTER AND THE OTHER POINT (A PENCIL) OR A FLINT BLADE WHICH WILL ROTATE AT THE SAME DISTANCE AROUND THE CENTER POINT. A HOLE SAW WORKS ON THE SAME PRINCIPLE WITH THE CENTER DRILL BUT HAS A ROUND BLADE. JUDGEING FROM THE SKILL OF THEIR CARVINGS IT WOULD NOT SUPRIZE ME IF THEY HAD THESE TOOLS CRUDE THOUGH THEY MAY BE. MANY TRIBES SEEM TO HAVE HAD LITTLE PROBLEM MAKEING PERFECT CIRCLES IN CARVING, SAND ART, POTTERY AND ELSEWHERE AS THE MOON AND SUN WERE OFTEN WELL DRAWN CIRCLES.
PERHAPS A SIMPLE CORD WITH A CENTER PIN WAS USED TO MARK THEM OUT. THE NATIVE AMERICANS BOTH NORTH AND SOUTH WERE CERTIANLY ADVANCED ENOUGH TO HAVE FOUND THESE CONCEPTS ON THEIR OWN.
I WOULD NOT BE SURPRIZED TO FIND OTHER ANIMALS CARVED ON THESE CLUBS AS DIFFERENT TRIBES AND GROUPS HAD DIFFERENT TOTUMS. BEAR CLAN, EAGLE CLAN, KILLER WHALE CLAN, ECT. IF MOST OF THE LINE DRAWN CLUBS WERE COLLECTED BY CAPTIAN COOK FROM THE SAME CLAN THAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR THE PREVALANCE OF THE EAGLE FORMS. NOTABLE WARRIORS OFTEN HAD A HELMET IN THE FORM OF THEIR TOTUM THIS IS FOUND IN SOUTH AMERICA AS WELL THE JAGUAR AND EAGLE BEING WELL REPRESENTED.
I AM OFTEN SUPRIZED TO LEARN SOMETHING NEW OR AT LEAST DISCOVER NEW POSSIBILITYS. TODAY AT THE ARTEFACT SHOW I SAW AN OLD ARTEFACT RECENTLY FOUND HERE IN OKLAHOMA THAT RESEMBLES A SNOW KNIFE. WHICH BRINGS UP THE POSSIBILITY THAT NATIVES THIS FAR SOUTH MAY HAVE BUILT IGLOOS DURING THE ICE AGE. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS NEVER CROSSED MY MIND BUT IS IN THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY. OF COURSE IT MAY HAVE SERVED AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE 10 THOUSAND YEARS OLD??