I think that, Chris, is an oustanding researcher of many different types of beads, not just in a recent found admiration for Chinese and Japanese cloisonne. I hope she does 'become' the world's authority if not been already. Can anyone name me one authority now, if not her, then, who? I consider, Chris', and Frederick's opiniopns/ideas/assumptions as completely valid and from background as educated, who else would you trust better to research? Both members are highly repected here, and I much enjoy reading their thoughts about cloisonne. Its very appropriate that the cloisonne beads are being discussed here instaed of being dismissed as was in the past here of all places.

Nobody, and only she is asking the questions that 'need' asked, nobody has offered/given any real proof in answering with certainty. If anything, Chris, alone, has taken the pains to wade the waters of speculation in search of provenance from unknowing sellers of these beads.

If Chinese artists have been making cloisonne objects for hundreds of years then where are some of the beads from that earlier time? Miriam Haskell jewerly contains some of the earliest known examples, but its natural to want someone/anyone to unveil even earlier examples, maybe to see THE earliest known eamples, to view, compare, admire, classify as such. The late 1800's being the earliest known reference to cloisonne production in China, an assumption/belief that there is even earlier works...since there may not have been any receipts given to customere in such early times, so its the art itself that must be compared/proven as early/modern/recent/today. Here are some beads that look old!