...from intact old canes or copied designs from an earlier period? This is very interesting. I guess confusion is unavoidable when so many were found in later digs. It would be great if the info on these beads was consistent, but I suppose that "ain't gonna happen." Is there any "hard" archaelogical evidence of beadmaking sites to support any of this? I find these complex little beads incredibly beautiful and endlessly fascinating. So are you comfortable in describing the rather large, biconal mosaics(see pic) as "Alexandrian" and thus pre-Dark Ages? Thank you Jamey! sm

If beads from the Middle East are dug up in France and Germany, there is no chance of there being a beadmaking site where they are also found. That would be nonsensical. So, I guess I am not following your question, Steve.

Want to rephrase?

I have not seen the biconical beads you show, that I recall. What sizes are they? I think there is one somewhat biconical "Viking" bead in the Prehistoric Museum, but is like the so-called "checquer" beads distinct to Viking Period beads. The relationship to Alexandrian beads is evident--though the two styles are more different (or distinct) than similar.

Jamey

"borrowed"=old found/traded Roman canes resused at a later period. I have heard that this was done, thus making it possible for Roman-type beads to have been produced in Europe/elsewhere. Perhaps this is purely anecdotal(???). "Archaeological sites"=is there ANY hard evidence ANYWHERE to pinpoint a location where the Roman mosaic beads, or heck, ANY ancient beads, were actually produced? Thanks-sm

Hi Steve,

It's helpful to remember that in the sphere of ancient glassmaking and glassworking, there were two schools: 1) the Syrian tradition (consisting of MANY areas where this work was pursued, including places that are no in "Syria"—like Lebanon); and 2) the Egyptian school (where glass centers were few in number, but historically significant).

It is a well-promoted belief that in ancient times glassmaking centers created components, whether these be ingots or decorative elements, that were sold to smaller concerns where primary glassmaking was not conducted, but where easier glassworking was pursued. The glassworkers would remelt the glass and made beads (or whatever), and use the decorative elements for decoration or composition.

For instance, at Eqypt, this is most likely how the glass industry developed there, since the idea they would have the fuel for primary glassmaking is a stretch of the imagination. They would have had to import a LOT of wood for furnace fires to actually make glass. However, it took considerably less fuel to melt and use already-made glasses. Eventually, primary glassmaking may have been pursued in Egypt, but most likely not in the early introduction time. This is one of the controversaries that is bought up in the popular news every few years. So, it get claimed there's "evidence of primary glassmaking" in Egypt..., but, so far, I am not impressed by what I have read.

So, did "Roman" elements get so-used? Probably. This was a custom for a very long time, including into the Islamic Period (I would make an educated guess). Is there any proof that the "Alexandrian" glasses were made there in Roman times? Not specifically! There are only historical references that say Alexandria was the capitol of artistic glassmaking in Hellenistic times, plus the actual beads that appear to date from this period. So, it's like putting one and one together to make two. It is conventionally accepted that these are the products made by them. It's scant..., but there are rather more controversial theories that are promoted, for which there is even less evidence. I believe one of the problems with investigating Alexandria is that some parts of the old city are now under water, where recovery is technically limited and difficult.

So, what you say is certainly a possibility. However, it's a story I more associate with early glass in the Middle East (that may have traveled as far away as China); and with glassworking in the Islamic Period (where there's evidence for Middle Eastern elements being used by Scandinavian beadmakers). But I can't point to a "Roman" example of this phenomenon.

For information on the early spread of glassmaking and glassworking, I recommed The Glassmakers, by Samuel Kurinsky (1991). I do not agree with everything Sam has to say..., but I think his book is provocative. (See my review in Ornament.) Kurinsky presents maps, showing where he believes primary glassmaking was conducted in ancient times. I think some of this evidence may be flimsy or open to interpretation.

Jamey

At the risk of sounding ignorant ( and, I am just learning) I did not know that even very ancient beads can be referred to as Millefiori!!!! For some reason I thought all millefiori beads are Venetian! Thats why when I posted an obvious ancient bead on B.C.N and you said that you suspect that it is a Millefiori bead> I thought you meant a Venetian bead!!! Thanks you for your continual education! I know that Millefiori describes how a bead is made also but, didn't think the process was that ancient!

Jamey, this is the bead in question! Could it be Roman? The so-called Roman eye beads that are not really Roman. When, you look at the ends, the design also go right through to the core!

Hi christine,

"Millefiori" is a 19th C. Italian word that is applied to any glass product derived from pictorial/image canes, divided into segments ("murrine"), and used cross-section-upermost to compose or decorate the object. If it's not cross-section-upermost, it's not "millefiori work," but rather just "mosaic-glass." There are lots of styles and types of mosaic-glasses.

In a general way, the name "millefiori" is used to encompass objecxts made as early as ca. 300 BCE (and even earlier) through modern times. The Venetians revived/reinvented this work in the mid-1800s, which is when the name was devised too. Of course, they also had a first reinvention of this work in the 15th C., when rosetta (chevron) beads were devised. But in the 19th C. very few people understood that this work had been pursued some 400 years earlier. The earliest Venetian products, millefiori and chevron beads, were both called "rosetta work."

I begin to understand your reply to my comment about your bead. However, a Roman bead that's not a Roman bead is sort of convoluted..., don't you think? If there are no Roman Period beads in sub-Saharan West Africa, it stands to reason that the beads recovered in Mali (and environs) are from later times. Most likley Islamic times. I would guess that this is what your bead most likely is.

I recommend the article I wrote on millefiori beadmaking for Ornament (1982), as well as a recent piece I composed for the newsletter of the Bead Society of Great Britain, from this past year.

Jamey

Thank you, Jamey! That was very informative! All of my beads do not come from Mali nor any other country in Africa! I will be very careful to be very precise as to where I found certain beads!! Thank you!

I am hoping to travel this summer, Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland, Russia ETC.....I now must make the Prehistoric Museum in Munich one of my stops! Jamey do you think they would let a bead collector with "bead rabies" close enough to photograph still?
Thomas

Hi Thomas,

You just have to write ahead, and get an appointment. You may be able to get permission to shoot anything there, and even use a flash (which is a big help). My experience was that I was interrupted about five times by someone who told me (in German, of course) NOT to use the flash, whereupon I would pull out and show my permission slip....

It is a very worhwhile museum to see, in terms of the beads displayed. These include specimens from as early as ca. 3000 BCE or earlier (deer teeth, carved as pairs of breasts), the Bronze age, through the Phoenician beads of the Halstat Period, Roman Period, post-Roman, and Frankish/Islamic Period beads. The beads were made from amber, bronze and other metals, bone, and of course, glass.

Jamey

My first inquiry was answered today!

Dear Mr. *(TASART)*,

Thank you very much for your mail. Unfortunately I have to inform you that we don't have glass beads in our collection. We have many beautiful glass vessels in all collours und types: perhaps you are interested in them, too?
I hope so!
If you come to our museum you are always allowed to take photographs without tripod and flash.

I'm very sorry that I can't help you with your beads.
With best wishes

Heike Gregarek

Dr. Heike Gregarek
Stadt Köln - Der Oberbürgermeister
Römisch-Germanisches Museum / Amt für Archäologische Bodendenkmalpflege Roncalliplatz 4 D - 50667 Köln

Tel.: 0221 / 221 - 24388
Fax: 0221 / 221 - 24030
E-mail: Heike.Gregarek@stadt-koeln.de
Internet: www.museenkoeln.de/roemisch-germanisches-museum

Aktuelle Sonderausstellungen:

Verlängert bis zum 21. Mai 2006: "Anmut und Grazie. Die schöne Tanagräerin", Terrakotten des 4. und 3. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. aus Griechenland.

18. Januar bis 23. März 2006: "Burgen, Geheimgänge und Zauberei. 4000 Jahre Sicherheit".

im Praetorium (Eingang Kleine Budengasse, Historisches Rathaus) bis Juli
2006: "Kaiserbilder im Praetorium", Portraits aus einer norddeutschen Privatsammlung von Augustus bis Gallienus.

Köln - Stadt der Events - Austragungsort der FIFA WM 2006(TM) vom 9. Juni bis 9. Juli 2006

Here's a picture I took in the "Römisch Germanisches Museum" in Köln a couple of years ago. They didn't have a lot of beads on display but their ancient glass collection is outstanding.
Hendrik

...put it in a time-frame or say anything about it? There appear to be several similar ones on the strand. I would love to own one of these, but I don't think I have seen any for sale. sm

Hi Steve,

I also like these a lot; and I used to make them from Fimo, usually using leftovers.

The style is sort of related to the morfia bead, in that the decoration consists of twisted striped canes that are placed on the surface of the bead. In a morfia, the canes are longitudinal, and altering ones have reverse twists—creating a sort of "herringbone-like" pattern. (And by the way, this is the bead/pattern copied in many murakad/Kiffa beads, where we see parallel chevron lines—see my article in Ornament on this topic).

The present beads are made by spiraling the twisted striped canes around the circumference of the bead, from the north pole to the south pole. It may be one cane or several, and these canes may be twisted in opposite directions, or not.

This is a pretty simple bead to produce, so I expect Frankish beadmakers would have been able to do it if they so desired. However, since I know similar beads are brought out of Central Asia (Afghanistan and Iran), I suspect most speciems, even from Frankish sites, may be imported.

When viewing Frankish beads, the first thing you notice is that the color schemes rely heavily on three colors: brick-red, yellow, and white. Also, the technique oif these beads is fairly crude (compared to many others, even from much earlier in time). The use of blue and green is sparse if not almost absent. This is one of the reasons that imported beads stand out—since so many "Syrian" and "Egyptian" beads make ample use of blue and green (even if the "Frankish colors" are present too—which they usually are).

So when we see a spiral cable bead in a Frankish context, and the colors are primarily red and yellow, I have to consider the possibility it may be local. But it's easier to conclude it's imported, since we know Eastern beadmakers made them already.

Thanks for asking.

Jamey

Hi Jamey,
Thanks for clarifying. It seems so simple. I have a similar bead and tried to figure out how it was made and now it becomes clear. So I assume that these twisted canes were applied horizontally on the green core of the bead. (I made the bead wet to make the colours come out better.)
Talking about green, the few beads I have ,that I tought are Frankish have green colour in them. I'll post some pictures.
Hendrik

A bead I posted before but very similar to yours, this bead has a blue body color and is highly transluscent.

Hi,
Here are some of the beads I was talking about in the previous post. Another question about these beads Jamey. A while ago on the late(?) NBS you talked about the fact that you didn't like the use of Migration Period beads. Do you consider Frankish beads the proper term to use for beads made in this particular period(ca 500-800)?
Hendrik

I sure can tell you I love your beads!!!

Hello Hendrik,

Great beads!

It's not that I "don't like" the term "Migration Period"—it's more that I don't know how it is defined nor what is included or excluded from the name.

I accept that many people call these beads "Frankish," whether this is strictly true or not. Like any popular name, it is more appropriate in some contexts, and less so in others. And it's a regional name (like "Viking" beads in Scandinavia).

Jamey

That is a good point.

In general terms most of the time periods or era's that we refer to when describing beads are region specific. The migration period if it can be clearly defined is also regional, because practically speaking it only covers parts of Europe and Western Asia. The Roman era, even though it was quite large only covered the area of Roman influence, or trade. With the Roman or maybe even the Islamic period, we allow it to generally refer to a time period. For example a bead may have been made somewhere during the "Roman period", even though it was not necessarily Roman.

The so-called "Age of Exploration", or the Venetian/European glassmaking period was probably the only era that was world wide or at least covered the largest part of the earth. The most abused period by bead sellers and collectors is probably the Phoenecian trading era.

Nevertheless,I also agree that they are great beads Hendrik, and often very difficult to find, especially in good condition, congratulations.

Jan Skipper

"The Migration Period is a name given by historians to a human migration which occurred within the period AD 300–900 in the area which comprises Central Europe."
this was the first result in a GOOGLE search, it's a cute little "nutshell" answer and it might put it into perspective for some of us. I assume this could be used as a decriptive term in conjunction with a timeline when taking into considerations the "area" historians have in mind when using this term....Thomas

Hi Thomas,

Thanks.

However, I have said this previously and fairly RECENTLY— I KNOW what the "Migration Period" is or was.

What I said here is that I do not know what BEADS are supposed to be included or excluded from association with this historical phenomenon.

Do you see the difference?

Jamey

My post was solely to assist in explaining the Period and how it is defined in general terms, I did not mean "You" when I wrote:
"and it might put it into perspective for some of us"
I actually meant "Some of US",...."Me" included.
"I am not in the habit of preaching to the choir" is a quote that fits here.
Also, I do see the difference and when reading the multitude of literature on this subject one can come away more confused than ever.
The latest book I'm reading on related subject matters, "Glass Beads from Anglo-Saxon Graves: A Study on the Provenance and Chronology of Glass Beads from Anglo-Saxon Graves, Based on Visual Examination
by Birte Brugmann", is at times for me a bit tough to swallow, I do not have a problem with the dating (in fact it's one of the better volumes to deal with dating), I am having problems with description used in identifying the bead types. For instance the beads you describe as "Spiral Cable Beads" are described as "Reticella beads"......or another main group of beads are described as "Traffic signal? Traffic light" beads!!!(it is one of these terms, I can't remember which right now).
I know I must be speaking for other collectors as well when I say, "Confusion will reign until something acceptable, by all concerned, is set in stone ie.(the definitive handbook on beads)". Until then we are all left to sift the available information, removing chaff from fact, in the hopes of increasing our awareness of what's accurate. I for one thank you Jamey for making this easier for many of us.
Thomas

Hi Thomas,

It's possible I over-reacted a bit. I tend to get somewhat frustrated when I see that my posts are misinterpreted, and when I feel that replies missed the point, or don't add to the discussion. Sorry.

I'm not familiar with Brugmann's book—but I'll keep a look-out for it. How did you find it? My first thought is that if the book is an English translation of—say— a German text, there are likely to be many areas where the names may be clumsy and hard to put into English. Of course, that can happen in any translation, especially in a realm where names are made-up on the spot to suit the desire or purpose.

The name "cable bead" is basically synonymous with "reticella" or "filigrana" bead. I have used BOTH of the Italian names in the past. However, I think Americans are somewhat loathe to use "foreign" names for beads..., and sometimes I compromise and use or invent an English term. All of these names refer to preformed elements that are striped spirally twisted canes. There is some implication that reticella canes have superficial stripes, whereas filigrana canes have imbedded or submerged stripes. So these words are not precisely interchangeable. Plus, they were not devised to describe beads, but rather types of glass vessels. So there is possibly an adjustment due to the change in context.

Over the past twenty-five years (like my colleague Peter Francis, and others), I have called for standardized names and terms quite a few times—and I have promoted an understanding of names and processes to help people understand why these issues are significant. it seems like every week I start over for a new audience.... The last time I tried to do that here, I was more-or-less blown off and told I was "an egghead" who was wasting his time—and that my opinion wasn't any more valid and helpful than anyone else's opinion. Stuff like that makes progress difficult.

I hope to see you in Tucson, if not before then.

Jamey

Hello Jamey,
Thank you again for clarifying.
Here is some info on the book I was referring to, I also believe the "Bead Study Trust" had something to do with it, (grants, publishing?).
Thomas

Hi Jamey
You are talking to new people each time the questions are asked, so of course for each of them they are just starting out.
Its so rewarding in the long term to give encouragement as every new collector will remember their first encounter with someone who has more experience and they appreciate being listened to, very patiently, as they try to express their questions.
In turn they too will pass on the knowledge they are now receiving, and will also value the results of your deeper research.
Through teaching I learn more about beads and about what they represent for people.
This is quite a wonderful responsibility we have!

Stefany

Here's another bead from the same period(600-800). Size is 9X7mm.
Thanks for your comments.
Hendrik

good things come in small packages! sm

Here's another bead from the same period(600-800). Size is 9X7mm.
Thanks for your comments.
Hendrik