Earlier this year, I middle-manned a deal between two collectors, for a collection of heirloom beads from Borneo. Included were specimens of Lukut beads.

I had seen Borneo heirloom beads in the past, when I was hired to restring several necklaces, but I don't have any close-up photos from that time. The new group provides a nice opportunity for me.

Anyway, Lukut beads, I believe, are just Venetian trade beads of a certain design. They are not "Roman" nor even of a manufacture comparable to Roman Period makes. As such, the beads were traded to Island SE Asia, and are not nearly as old as many people suppose.

MANY beads that are said to be "Roman" are actually from about 1,000 or more years later. Only in the past 15 or so years have bead researchers (particularly me) begun to understand these issues, to promote a more realistic interpretation of beads, and to encourage the term "Islamic Period" for later ancient beads—as well as properly identifying modern trade beads that are also mistaken for ancient beads. Peter Francis, of course, was another sane voice on this issue.

Jamey