| Original Message: Quote |
|---|
|
Hi Evelyn, It is no secret that I disagree with Peter on this one. My perspective of pumtek beads is rather different. First off, the pumtek beads we saw coming out of India in the early 80s' were made from a variety of fossil (opalized) wood—as I remarked in the first article published on these beads since the ethnographic literature of the early 20th C. I showed specimens to Si Frazier in about 1983, and he remarked then that the material was NOT "palm wood" by the internal striations (as opposed to the dotted or spotty pattern of typical palm wood). It might be simplistic to presume that all of the material used for pumtek beads came from a single species. Next, the early pumtek beads (the so-called "Pyu" beads), also present a variety of materials, including something quartzy that doesn't appear to be a fossil wood at all (though granted these are very small beads, and it might not be apparent). Unfortunately, Peter had a tendency to make sweeping generalizations when he had not viewed enough specimens to have a clear picture. I suggested this to him in about 1980. Jamey All rights reserved by Bead Collector Network and its users |
|
|