Bronze Statue

[Hoss]

Well last weeks question on the cup really amazed me. Roger you have one heck of a database man. LOL I bought this at a tag sale about ten years ago. It is Bronze and heavy. I paid only five bucks for it because I thought it was cool at the time. I think it portrays. Mohamed but I know nothing else about the piece. He is 6" tall and the base is 2" square. 1.36 Lb or 0.616886 Kg There are file marks along the edge of the base no makers marks though. It appears that it was made in two section then put together. See the detailed pictures of the bottom of the coat. It looks like that was once hollow and the legs were put is and then metal poured into the coat to hold it all in place. It is what made me think it was something older and worth more than just five bucks that made me buy it.
Anyway Roger any help would be appreciated. Approximate age am I spot on with Mohamed or would this be a Zoroaster? Actually anything you can share would be awesome.
Thanks in advance
Hoss

[Hoss]

If anyone else would like to add to the discussion please feel free. I have no idea what it is but like I said with that detail in a solid piece of Bronze I figured five bucks was worth it.
Thanks for looking
Hoss

[rmartin]

I have no idea Hoss but I have been an antique dealer and picker for a lot of years and I wouldn't hesitate on 5 bucks.

[painshill]

Hi Hoss
It’s highly unlikely to be Muhammad. The Islamic religion has forbidden the depiction of the Prophet since sometime around the 16th or 17th Century. Although drawn and painted images do exist, they often have the face blanked out and it would be rare to find a full depiction in the form of a statuette. If it were of Muhammad, I would have recommended taking the image down. The depiction of “sentient beings” in general (human and animal) is discouraged by the Hadith (used as a means of interpreting the Quran) - especially among Sunni Muslims.
I don’t think it’s a Persian Zoroaster either. He is most usually depicted with one or more of the following: a radiating “crown of glory”; carrying a wand or staff; right index finger pointing vertically upwards.
The headgear looks to me like an Indian turban (Sikh or Hindu) rather than an Arabesque one. If it is from the Indian subcontinent, it’s not a deity statue. Those always include some distinctive iconography that identifies them - but it could well be a sage or cleric. The Hindu sage Valmiki is often depicted with a book (the Sanskrit epic “Ramayana”)… but normally he is shown writing it, since the manuscript is attributed to him. More likely, I think it’s a probably a generic sage… ie not depicting anyone in particular... carrying the messages of the Ramayana (or some other religious teachings). The Sikh religion doesn’t have a set of scriptures or religious texts as such. That’s my best guess.
Datewise, who knows… 1800’s perhaps? I too would take a punt on these kinds of curiosities if they are cheap enough. It doesn’t appear to be tourist junk from a market and even as home décor it’s a good 5 bucks worth I would say.

[Hoss]

Roger thank you for the help. Your description and explanaition helps me understand why i cannot find much more on this.
I was thinking late 1800's. How about the way that looks like it was tow parts put together in that way? It seemed strange to me.

[painshill]

Hoss wrote:

Roger thank you for the help. Your description and explanaition helps me understand why i cannot find much more on this.
I was thinking late 1800's. How about the way that looks like it was tow parts put together in that way? It seemed strange to me.

  Hi Hoss
The construction is very typical of a casting made by the traditional lost-wax (cire-perdu) method. It is usual for such figurines to have a separately-made base which is then welded to the top of the figurine. It is also usual for the base to have those filing marks where “flash” was removed.
Together with the crudeness of the “welding” on that piece, it confirms that it has been made in a traditional workshop and is not a modern mechanically-moulded tourist piece. But it doesn’t help in putting a more precise age on it since that method has been used (especially in India) since at least the 4th Century.
There’s some good information about how to spot the differences between traditional and mechanical casting here:

http://www.lotussculpture.com/mechanical.htm