These look like early Czech beads and they are quite beautiful and detailed. I base that attribution on the fact that they are graduated, silky appearance of the glass, beige background color, application of controlled swirls, shade of red and orange in the swirls.

Discurse is point and counterpoint - isn't that so? The previous poster finds this beads beautiful. Bummer! In my book-of-beauty they rank on the last page. They are made in a simplistic way, the "design" is random and without any sense. The flipside of beauty! Despite all their truely lovely beads and jewellery, Gablonz was not an experienced lampworker!

I think that the lampwork that has come from Gablonz can measure up to many other places where glass beads have come from. More specifically, a lot of people can not distinguish between the lampwork beads from Gablonz and Venice.

Here are some examples of lampworked beads from Gablonz that require great skill and experience.

I respectfully disagree, Floor. Massively! The difference between lampwork from Gablonz and Venice can only be measured by lightyears!
Not that proof is really needed in my opinion, but the beads you posted (right side) are proof of that. Any beginner is able to make such pieces. Unfortunately I cannot see the sample-card very well, but the card seems to show simple beads with a Millefiori cane.

Anybody else thinking Gablonz was an equal lampworker in comparison to Venice? Surprise me!

Have you ever done any lampworking? I have, and can see which types take skill and which do not. Perhaps that explains why my perspective is different.
I would be interested to see which Venetian beads you consider to be so exceptional. The vast majority of trade beads they made do not require a lot of skill. Basic millefiori beads, trailed beads, dotted beads, etc.
Throughout history, there have been some exceptional Venetian lampwork artists for sure. However, the bulk of the lampwork beads in both Venice and Gablonz have been made by craftspeople who made production beads of similar quality.

What makes you think I am not a beadmaker?

Aside of contemporary American and Japanese beadmakers (and the fakers from "Neverland") nobody can hold a candle to the class of lampworked beads from Venice.

Not Bavaria, not Lauscha, not China, not India and certainly not Gablonz.

As you know, I very much appreciate the Bohemian industry and all they achieved, but lampworked glassbeads are definitely not among their products of pride!

I seriously wonder why nobody takes a stand pro Murano, assuming that all of us have at least a little collection of their fine products, enabling you to have an opinion. Not...?

Here's my 2 cents -
For the large bulk of beads made during the "trade bead era" I think the Venetians made more attractive beads, but not necessarily "better made" beads. Since I don't have expertise in lamp work, I can only comment on other aspects of the beads.

The Venetians, to my eye, had better glass to work with, in a wider range of colors, than the Bohemians or Dutch for that matter. A good example would be the ruby or carnelian reds that were based on gold compounds. They also finished most of the beads for the African trade by knocking off the surface gloss. The combinations of colors and subtle surface finishes make the Venetian beads unique (and somewhat easy to identify, IMHO).

That being said, a lot of the Venetian lamp work was average to sloppy - and while that adds a certain rustic or tribal look to a group of beads with the same pattern, I have often been frustrated by the sometimes large variations in decoration, shape & size, as well as defects in the manufacture, when trying to compose a nice necklace.

So who made the "best" beads? I think it's purely a matter of taste and also the specific beads one is attracted to.

Rosanna,
"it's purely a matter of taste" you say in variation of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".

Had you argued that beauty is in the mind - not eye - of the beholder, I could agree a bit easier. But still not fully, though it is hard to argue against this saying.

Question:
If beauty is in the eye of the beholder - is ugliness also?

The saying means that beauty is a universal concept, a collectively undecidable notion with a definition that is completely observer-based. Each person will filter the idea of beauty according to a very personal lense of social, emotional, cultural and spiritual values. Their is usually a general consensus of what beauty means, but we never know how much this concept is surreal and manufactured by the media and their biased outlook on the world, supported by corrupted politics, big money and a handful of fashion designers as puppet-masters of taste.

On the other side there is Leonardo da Vinci, Corbusier, Dali and others who tried to achievce beauty through a mathematical concept, "The Golden Ratio" and/or the "Devina Proporzione".

The argument that beauty is in the eye of the beholder has its merits and most would possibly agree, when physical aspects of a person are discussed. But what when we view political and philosophical concepts and ideas? Would anybody be applauded, could anybody even dare to publically state that Pol Pot, Stalin and Stroessner (to mention three bastards from ane endless list) had beautiful ideas? Would that still be in the eye of the beholder?

Back to beads:
I have no idea what you mean when saying that Murano, quote: "...knocked off the surface gloss" of their beads. Are you saying Venice matted its beads, before they were shipped to Africa?

In conclusion I say that the argument that beauty is in the eye of the beholder is a "discussion-killer argument", one that shuts up a discourse with nothing but 8 words - but no further arguments.

On a scale from 1 to 10 my rank is as follows:

10 points for the best contemporary American lampwork beads
10 points for the beads modern beads from Japan
7 points for the unknown fakers today
6 points for "old Venice"
5 points for Indonesia
3 points for Purdalpur and Benares (and myself)
2 points for Gablonz

What if we exchanged the word "beauty" against the term "aestetics".
Would that also be in the eye - or mind - of the beholder...?

Your question: Are you saying Venice matted its beads, before they were shipped to Africa?

Answer: Yes. This is documented in the book "Ercole Moretti" by Gianni Moretti. Probably in other places as well.

Another detail noted in this book is that the ends of many cylindrical beads were ground at an angle so that the beads would nest together and not pinch the skin. Up until I read this book, I had erroneously assumed the ends had been ground to shape in Africa.

beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me, these beads are beautiful because (not in spite) of their random design, and the colors are just gorgeous. Not a bead I'd pay much $ for, but would love to have to play with!

Nora

Did you not just confirm what I said? To get beauty and quality (in products) requires more cash than the avarage or the not-beauty. Much more cash in most cases!

I say so to proof that beauty is possibly not (completely) in the eye of the beholder and that there is common sense about beauty. On the individual level that is obviously different.

Big subject - what is beauty and what is not!

!

Are you saying, Floor, my beads are...

- below Gablonz level
- same as Gablonz level
- above Gablonz level?

Don't be shy!

I will say that I think that 90% of the beadmakers in both Venice and Gablonz at the height of trade bead manufacturing period would not easily be able to make all of the beads that you showed. Some of your beads show more precision than the vast majority of beads that were made to be traded overseas.

Floor, hi! I was just about to change my post a bit. Wanted to add that I was not fishing for compliments with my question - then saw your post. Thanks for your compliment, but I do not think that I can compete with Venice. Definitely not! But I am still confident that I can very much compete with Gablonz. Saying so in my effort to strengthen my argument that Venice made better beads than Gablonz could and did.

It is very true (what you said) that Venice had the advantage of better glass, not to forget the routine aspect of it. Venice beadmakers made beads every single day, week-by-week-, month-by-month and year-by-year and possibly even longer. I doubt that Gablonz had been that busy, as far as lampworking goes.

True is also what Rosanna said - that many Venetian beads were rather sloppy. They knew they were producing for the African markets and were certainly paid by piece (not by beauty), leaving ultimate quality by the side of the road.

That they have been able to do better, much better, can be seen on the VERY SAME models made for European/American consumption. I have often tried to copy Venetian beads, since it seemed to be a rather easy thing to do. But...? But it wasn't. I have never been able to duplicate Venetian beads in the same quality.

The beads I made - without training actually - are on the simple side of the spectrum. Everybody with a steady hand can apply a number of dots to a round "ball-of-fire" (actually the name I gave my unregistered "workshop" at the time). The final bead looks more difficult than it really is. Not to forget - it took me roundabout 30-60 minutes to create a single such bead. Venice, I believe, made 10 if not 20 time this amount, during the same time.

It is my believe that most beadmakers in Murano could have been much better without a ticking clock. There wasn't a reason to do so, obviously, since it was the amount that counted, not the beauty of an individual bead.

Look at Chevrons - an(other) achievment of Venice, not Gablonz or any other lampworking centre. Look at latticino, often used on their better pieces - absent on Gablonz beads.

If you have a collection of lampworked Gablonz beads, I would love to see them. Maybe you get me finally convinced that Bohemia was not as simple a beadmaker, as I (still) believe.

My Gablonz lampwork "collection"!

Kinda cute - but sophisticated...?

.

Jurgen, I believe you've already posted this one - lovely, Venice, largely traded into Egypt.

Yes, Joyce I (knew I) had already posted it. I thought it was worth showing a second time - in comparison to the Czech "classic" - to proof the superiority of Muranese beadmakers.

OK - then take this as new comparison!

Actually the bead - both of them - are not mine. They were pics I found online!

Funny that you say this beads - the Venetian bocone - was traded to Egypt! Can you tell how do you know?

When I was in Egypt a few years ago - before Western invaders and war-profiteurs tried to turn the country into a democracy (...) - I was trying to make contact with some antique dealers, in my then naive hope to be able to buy some ancient Egyptian faience. Leave alone this was a very dangerous attempt, I finally left the dealer with one single bead.

Actually the VERY SAME ONE (!!) I posted (though the one I posted isn't the one). I hear today for the first time, that those types were made for the Egyptian market, something, I assume, you possibly know from sample-cards. Is that so or do you have another source for this information?

Talking about Egypt. Actually a very-very-very beautiful country, also aside from the ancient pharaonic architecture. Beadwise it wasn't worth it (but beads were not my reason to visit), though I found a beautiful blue-and-white checker bead for pennies. Still - two major disappointments. The main one is the Museum in Cairo. I was stunned who careless the little artefacts were presented. Like in a dusty provincial museum from the late 19th century. Couldn't believe it!

On the way to SIWA (Alexander) I had my first major and nearly deadly accident, when I realized too late that bus was standing on the straight-lonely road to the oasis, and not running. After an 80 meters sleigh-ride - as police had meassured later - I hit the massive, old Russian tank-kinda bus on the backside (without seat-belt). That I am able to write this post today, was a matter of a second. Had a hit the breaks only a bit later, that had been it for me and my passenger. The damage was massive anyway!

Info is from J. Picard, and interestingly I've noticed the same design for sale from a seller in Egypt.

You'll see a better image of one of ours in the bead image slide show on the the BCN home page...

It was thought a few years ago that these were Czech - very nice work, I think. I think Floor showed a sample card with similar examples.

A nice strand! Are you sure the beads are really Gablonz-made? I have doubts, but no arguments pro or con. I think Murano because I saw lots such beads from the sweet little island in Venice, but never a confirmed such bead from Gablonz.

Latticino is not a difficult thing to produce - neither it is to apply, no matter who does it (on a bead).

I must admit this:
I looked for quite some time to find overwhelmingly beautiful Murano beads (to support my claim), but could not really find one. Of course I saw many lovely Millefiori and the understatement of a simple "Cornaline d'Aleppo" is convincing too, if you ask me, but I could not really find any Murano bead that would be a real challenge to make.

Murano invented so many recognizable designs, what might also play a role, why I find them more beautiful.

I still believe Murano was the better beadmaker - technically spoken - but it is true that many of their beads are indeed rather simple.

In comparison US-beadmakers - Japanese too - are literally lightyears ahead of Murano. The reason seems clear: Murano produced a product. US beadmakers create art! What they do, what many of them do, is truely overwhelmingly beautiful, highly artistic and unbelievable difficult to make. Without "blue artblood" in your veins it is impossible to reach such levels. I could train for years and year without even coming close. It's a special talent to do what the "Crème de la Crème" of US beadmakers create. It's stunning and often real, true art!

To watch this geniuses is frustrating for a beadmaking-nobody like me.

Check out some of those beads I mean...

Both beads are just....pffff....beyond stunning. This technique, this creativity, this invention, this colors and shapes. Both come very close to the "golden ratio".

DEVINE ART!!

.

Thank you all for your opinions....a whole can of worms there. I still think that they are quite lovely.....but I take it that they are Czech and of fairly low value.....I might just have them restrung and wear them.....so many necklaces so little time.