It looks very 3rd world to me...
I agree the "hind legs" are not of the rest of the cabinet...
Where did it come from? What do they know? Gather all the clues you have because I sure have never seen anything quite like it. Those animal paws are amazing!
Linda C

The front "paw" legs are in need of some restoration and I need to firm up where they're attached to the cabinet. But, they're on there well enough for now and I'm not touching anything on this until I can learn a little more.

Unfortunately, this came from an antique mall and there's really no chance of learning more about it from that source. Oddly enough, they do have another cabinet with a fairly similar style in another part of the store.

Amazing! Dare I say Middle Eastern? I've seen some Moroccan antiques along similar lines, but not enough to draw a positive conclusion. However, try Googling Middle Eastern antiques, and see if you don't run across something similar.

I love the work that went into this piece, and can't wait to see what you find out about it! If you have the space, and money, I'd pick up the second one as well. They'd make a huge impact!

Even though I only have rudimentary knowledge of dating antiques, I'm reasonably confident saying this goes back to at least the 1700's. I see a few signs (like the apparently riven boards on the back, etc) that make me think it could go back even further, but I just don't have the knowledge to peg it down at all. I hardly dare to think how old this thing really is, ya know?

The other cabinet was somewhat similar, but the coloring was more of a very faded whitewash. I'll discuss it again with my wife since it caught her eye for a moment as well, but I'm not sure we'll pick it up. When we were carting this one out of the store we looked at them side-by-side and while they have some common styling elements, they're not necessarily companion pieces. Space could be an issue, as well as money after working on the taxes last night. No refund this year, gotta dig for more deductions!

Just for fun, here's a shot of the back of the hammered rivets holding the hinge.

I'd like to clean this thing up some, but I'm wary of doing anything to it at all until I learn more.

I don't believe it's as old as you think....but rather that it was made somewhere were that old methods were used much later than in other parts of the world. I have seen things with the hand hewn boards in shops in Lamu, in the Comoros Islands and other places with a strong Arab influence.
Those feet look like there should be some significance there...what kind of animal do you suppose theya re supposed to be?
And are there any signs of wear? So far all that you say shows age is the method of manufacture...but if it's really old you should see some signs of wear.
What does the inside look like?
'Tis a puzzle for sure!
Linda C

I'll get a better picture of the front feet later today. They're not in great condition, in fact that's the part showing the most wear. I'll also pay more attention to the other wear indicators. You do have a good point about the methods of manufacture, although from what study I've done that's one of the major ways of dating a piece of furniture. Hmmm, time for a little more digging.

Just a few weeks ago I picked up a rolltop desk with a lock that has a patent date from 1892. I remember thinking that was plenty old, but I still believe this one predates that by a good chunk. Now if I could just get a key for the lock on that desk, the only locksmith I know that can do that sort of thing wants $85!

Just because the lock was patented in 1896 doesn't mean the lock was made then....that's when the patent for the lock was granted. That is the earliest the lock could have been made...unless it was made for a while under the patent applied for lable, undoubtedly it was made for many years after that.
I don't know what kind of a lock it is....but very often there were a few "standard" keys and one of those "old guy" locksmiths with a huge ring of keys will have something that fits...without having to have one made.

As for methods of construction being an indicator of when a piece was made...you are correct in that. But that serves more as a bottom end of age estimate. For example if you see a piece with evidence of the boards having been sawn with a circular say, that only means it wasn't made before that type of saw was invented....because even after the circular saw was in wide use, there were still some old guys using a pit saw. And because a drawer has a chamfered bottom doesn't mean that a certain cabinet maker didn't think that the old ways were best, even though other makers were using a thin board bottom.
And I will tell you there are people in 3rd world countries using hand tools and hewing the lumber with an axe.
The feet look dog-like to me...but what sort of people would make a cupboard with dog feet????
Linda C

I know what you're saying about the lock, I'm shouldn't make it sound like I'm making an exact estimate on the age. I just figure it puts it in a potential range. Just for fun one day I went on the U.S. Patent website and dug up the original patent for the lock, filed by someone named James Roche. Frankly, I'm not as worried about the age of the desk, it's a decent looking antique that I use on a daily basis. I've been wanting one for years and came across this for a fair price. I'm going to try a couple of other older locksmiths to see if they can help, otherwise I'll just pick up another lock with a key.

As for the feet, like I said I'll post a better pic later. Do you think they could be griffin feet?

Nope...a griffon is a bird/dragon and had bird claws....
I am also thinking South or Central America...?

The feet could be lion's paw feet. There are many variations of this style. Again, Google is your best frien here.

I'm going to toss my first impression in, could be really off the wall, but... ;D

The body and top ornamentation appears to have a Spanish influence to me. But not Spain, as in S. American mission type. I zoomed in on the front feet and they don't really look like they belong. But hey, you never know. They too made me think South American, only SA Indian. Why? Because of what appears to be a row of 'beads' around the ankle of the feet.

That's it, just my first impression and humble .02.
Interesting piece!

My take on this piece is European in origin. Age!!?? I have no idea. Take it to one of the "antique roadshows" on the PBS network --- then again -it may even baffle them. Good luck!

Here's the pictures I promised of the feet. You can see how they're beat-up and splayed out a bit. Believe it or not, they tip out that far but then they hold pretty solid. Of course, we're not exactly adding a bunch of weight to the cabinet, either. You can clearly see the beads around the ankles, and the battered claw-tips at the tips of the toes on the feet. (Try to ignore where I need to sweep the floor, LOL)

Here's a shot of the board across the bottom between the feet. Sorry it came out so dark.

And someone asked about the wear on the item. As an example, I propped up one of the pull-rings on the front. You can see the indentation where it rests and some of the other general wear in that area. The top shelf on the inside could show some cupping-type wear, or it could be from the rough plane-work on the boards. I can't be sure.

The Antique Roadshow isn't exactly coming to my neighborhood.

In my opinion.......the looks of the front feet and the back legs, just don't make sense. THe cupboard and the 2 side pediments are pretty much straight lines. THe bulbus back legs,and front feet are far from following the semitree(sp?) of the piece.

Just my thoughts,
SB

That occurred to me before as well. That's why I said in my first post that I wasn't sure that that I wasn't sure any of the legs were original (right above the picture of the back of the cabinet, where you can see the rear legs)