.

Original Message:   INDONESIAN BEADS
1.) If the beads - or some of them - were Venetian (what they are not), the original poster, possibly the one with the best information on the strand, might have said so in the title of his/her original post.

2.) The "guarantee" is an artefact we have to consider (wishing most beads or strands had a tag, informing us about the date of purchase). Still - guarantees can be wrong, and often are. While it seems unlikely this "guarantee" is wrong about time, it is wrong on provenance (as far as Venice is concerned). What did "Scientific establishments" know about beads in 1967?

3.) The original post and the "guarantee" together let me assume both, buyer and "Sci-fi establishment" might be one and the same party. At least related.

4.) This beads are so CLEARLY un-Venetian that I am stunned they could be seen otherwise. Still - on a discussion forum anyboy can (and should!) speak her/his mind, no matter right or wrong, though!

5.) It is open for Thomas to explain, what he means, when saying the beads are "recent". I assume he means "not antique".

6.) Bead Nr. 12 (right side, counted from the end of the strand) is of interest to me, because it's undoubtedly an original Venetian design. Getting that confirmed (through dated sample-cards, hopefully) we know "Bead Nr. 12" should be of younger age.

7.) The (lovely!) patina of the beads let me assume further not only all beads are from the same maker (Indonesia - neither Venice, leave alone China), but from the same period. A few decades before 1967 is my assumption, mainly because not much of the visible patina could have been added between 1967 and today.

8.) Everybody is entitled to her/his own ideas, of course. But it is always helpful to deliver arguments and fact to bolster them, arguments that led to believes or ideas in the first place. "Believes" alone are not a helpful tool, trying to solve an assumed riddle.

9.) In my previous post I argued that not more than 5 beads on that strand might be of Venetian origin. I reduce that number down to the only two I am not certain about (the red cylinder right of the coin and the one I called "Bead Nr. 12"). All other beads are not Venetian, but INDONESIAN!

10.) For those who might argue that it was me myself who admitted that my knowledge on both, the Venetian and especially the old/er Indonesian bead industries is not rock solid, so how could he be so sure, I say:

This is not a riddle in my opinion. None that needs ultimate knowledge of either industry.

PS Where are the opinions of those cracks who know more on such beads and the industry that created them?

Out fishing...?

Copyright 2024
All rights reserved by Bead Collector Network and its users

BackPost Reply

 Name

  Register
 Password
 E-Mail  
 Subject  
  Private Reply   Make all replies private  


 Message

HTML tags allowed in message body.   Browser view     Display HTML as text.
 Link URL
 Link Title
 Image URL
 Attachment file (<256 kb)
 Attachment file (<256 kb)