I think many collectors feel they are curators of the beads they collect, and try to preserve them as-found. However, most of us are not finding old beads in the location where they were originally made or traded - they have passed through many hands and locations. So true curating becomes a problem due to lack of accurate provenance.

Many beads are altered (for example the Bakelite beads I've been collecting) before we acquire them. Re-drilling, carving, repairs, cleaning, etc are all found. So, making further alterations is just adding to the history of the bead, IMHO. Unless part of an archaeological dig site, I feel that all beads are meant to be worn and enjoyed, in whatever way the owner likes.

Just some thoughts for a sunny Thursday morning!

We are only here on earth with our beads for a short time. We are their custodians only...after we are finished with them, they go back into the river, so to speak, to be with new people. In order to have certain beads with us, we sometimes have to purchase them at prices we wish we hadn't had to.......and that, in the pragmatic, material world, makes us the current owner. As owner, yes, you have the right to drill, sand, paint, smash or string them however you like. And you have the right to keep them as original as possible if you like, too.

Related, a point I've been pondering for a time is the degradation and failure of stringing material causing lots of beads to wind up in loose piles. Beads turn up that were once parts of Mandarin Court Necklaces, Liberty necklaces, matched graduated strands of Venetians, etc...I admit I do cringe when one takes apart a necklace like those that is still structurally sound, because that's one fewer of those intact necklaces in the world, and without being part of the finished piece, the beads have thereby lost their provenance. But it's the right of the current owner to do whatever they wish, so I must accept that.

I'm seeing a number of vintage Venetian mixes, newly restrung on eBay lately, which tells me it's about the right time for the linen or cotton on those nearly 100 years old strands to be falling apart...leaving lots of cool old beads for serious hunters like Stefany to find....and to restring into mixed strands, some looking like better combinations than others....

I used to spend a fair amount of time concerning myself with accurate descriptions...but now I feel a bit more like Birdi. As images have improved over the years, they can become more important than the text nowadays....and I now wonder whether I should write to sellers. Some are gracious and appreciate the help (that's a relief!) but others simply ignore you or argue....so I sometimes do nothing...in this case, the seller appears very very sure about origins of the beads offered in the attached image as

ANTIQUE-19TH-CENTURY-VENETIAN-MURANO-FIORATE-LAMPWORK-MIXED-GLASS-BEAD-NECKLACE

but a better title would be....

“Venetians with 6 possibly Czech glass beads and 3 new Chinese glass beads”

The new stuff is sneaking into the piles of the old stuff, being put together. It's part of the whole "life's a river" thing - I try not to get upset about it.

Thanks for the opportunity to ramble, Fred.

Certainly a mix, but if you have the time, I would be interested to know which ones you point out as Czech and which ones as Chinese.

To me, there could easily be more than 6 Czech ones in there, and I think the ones you may think are Chinese could also be Czech. These strands are quite tricky, that is why I would welcome a detailed look together.

I can see maybe 10 recent indian lampwork beads, too!

Here's an image of this strand, with numbers so we can have fun with the ID's.
Beads I'm pretty sure are Venetian, 1930s or older: 3, 10, 13, 17, 19, 35, 36, 37, 38, 44.

Venetian (yes) but newer? : 8, 11, 43, 46 (I have some of these) and 18, 22, 25, 27, 29, 51.

Would appreciate input from the guys & gals!

i have very similar 1990s Indian beads to nos:
4, 5, 6, 7, 14, 22, 40, 47, 48, 49, 50... or did have even if there aren't many left because they got sold...
that rather orangey red is a typical indian glass colour, even with the avventurina on top...

These are very popular with bidders currently and ever since I've been watching online, especially versions absent aventurine. I call them full melt wedding cake designs, but others might call them Fancies without any more distinction. If there is a better name I'd love to know it. I think of them as "those"... so awkward.

Curious about these.

The long oval has some very skilled lampworking techniques. The latticino is lovely and the floral design is full melt and skillfully executed. I have never seen this bead before, nor any round examples.

The two shorter ovals, I have no opinion, but they look good with the larger bead.

The round with black and white latticino 16 looks like India to be because I've had latticino Indian beads in other colors... but I might be wrong.

I found another photo. It has a millefiori cane slice.

I think 9 and 45 are newer Chinese beads. Note the weak colors and thick clear layer over a colored core.

Maybe 34 is also Chinese, but that's just a guess. I wouldn't buy it.

added later: Cool, Joyce agrees with me.

I feel numbers 20, 24, and 30 may be Japanese

23 is Venetian. I have one in pink. I've seen them in the Sick catalog.

Venetian 'wedding cake' beads, old style with raised trailings over gold guilding: 3, 17, 19, 35, 36, 37, 51,

18 has aventurine and feathering, not really wedding cake genre. The white glass is semi translucent. Do they call this something like waxy or greasy? Might be Czech, might be Venetian.

When they are all ID'd I'll re-do the photo with ID on each bead.

I really appreciate everyone's input!

21 and 33 have satin glass. does this make them Czech?

I agree with what most have said, with a few exceptions.

The ones that I think may very well be Czech are: 2, 9, 12, 15, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 30, 33, 34, 39, 42, 52.
So Birdi, that includes the ones you were curious about, and the ones that Fred thinks are Japanese.

About some I am more sure than others. Also, since I am a three day art exhibit, I do not have the time right now to check them against sample cards.

This has turned into a very interesting exchange of thoughts.

A fairly quick assessment for Czech for me...21,15,12,26,33,39,24,30

Chinese...45,34,9

I hope you show went great!

This has been fun, let's do it again!

Please, others chime in too.

The ones you point out that may be Chinese, I'm most doubtful of myself. However, I have seen those encased beads made in the Czech Republic, so could be either, I guess.

You are the eye-witness, for sure. I feel that I'd have to hold some of those beads for a more informed opinion. Bottom-line, though, this strand is an example of the times we are in - beads from various origins and eras will be mixed and grouped together, onward and always.

Several beads still have no IDs - so my best guesses are:

1, 53 - probably Venetian
18, 31, 38 - also probably Venetian
16, 32, 41 - ??

I vote India for #41. The white of the blue/white spot isn't right, it would be more opaque in a Venetian bead.

both 16 and 41 are ??? for me - 32, probably Venetian.

I'm feeling more confident than ever the latticino round black/white #16 is from India. Same with the black with blue and white #41.

confirmation of bead 23, combed 2 color floral round.

My first thought about green bead 38 is Venetian. I've been wondering about the pasty sage green color myself. I sometimes think India when I seethe color. I looked through the Sick collection researching bead #38. I found similar shape/decoration. The exact light color green seems to be found in some of the later cards, and other variations of green shade. Circumstantial evidence, not conclusive proof.

The color rendition for any picture on the internet is always a problem. I just bought a clothing article that I thought would be brown, and it's actually a medium green color, for example.

The photo I posted with the numbers - I used iPhoto to darken and enhance the color a bit since the original photo was somewhat washed-out. So, may never know exactly what shade of green is on this bead.

Ditto for #27 - I have some similar beads but they are not this shade of green.

I left intact the designations for the ones that were in dispute: Japanese or Czech, and Chinese or Czech.

V = Venice
I = India
C = China
CZ = Czech
J = Japan

Thanks everyone for contributing to this bead "exercise" - I learned a lot!

for straying from the original subject matter. But it is all connected, I believe.

It should be educational for the seller, should he/she care to learn more. I believe the person selling these beads and others knows some things but is still learning.

This strand was interesting because it contained a number of beads that were made in two different places, so it is difficult to be certain which from photographs.They are 'borderline' beads, could be one or could be the other.. We have some that were made similar in appearance: Venetian style beads by Czech makers. Venetian style beads made in India. Czech style beads made in China. Which is the original and which is the newer version? We are uncertain based solely on photographs. We might or might not find further clues in person.

I prefer threads to unravel as they may -I do not want my questions to appear as though I am looking for the "correct answer."

Hi Fred,

The original question, which was a good one, seems to have gotten sidetracked by a specific necklace. In my humble opinion, the answer like many others when dealing with collectibles is: "IT DEPENDS".

Many of the worlds great museums think nothing of restoring ancient material either by cleaning or repairing or whatever. I have always leaned towards not touching anything, sometimes I won't even wash the dirt off. There are case though when a bead or group of beads are in such poor condition, that leaving them alone may be a disservice.

Some of the marble beads for example are so badly beat up that they almost deserve being restored. Drilling something that was never intended to be a bead originally, well that is doubtful in my mind. There are also cases with ancient beads where the burial patina is so heavy one cannot see the original bead.

In the end of course you own the bead and can do whatever you want with it, though hopefully not modifications meaning to deceive someone as to what it was originally. I would like to hear more comments on the original question.

Below is a bead that started life as an ancient eye bead and had a more modern face cane attached, obviously intended to deceive a potential buyer.

It seems that I was the cause for the derailment from the original question, so the least I can do is answer it with my thoughts.

For me, whenever something is in a state or context that feels like there is a story attached to it, I will not alter it.
However if something is made purely for sales, or ease of travel, I do not have any hesitation. This is for example the case for me with most strands of trade beads.

One bead that had me think for a while as to what to do, was this Warring States Bead. I bought in China, one day after Redmountain (who I met in Beijing) had warned me about Warring States beads often having the eyes repaired or faked.

Even though I was warned, I did not see what was wrong with this bead until after I bought it. I believe it is an original Warring States bead, but the yellow eyes are fake. They are made of polymer clay and are glued on. At first I wanted to take them off. But I have decided that this is now a bead with a story that is interesting to be kept as is.

first question: in my eyes the owner has all rights to make changes...

second: you can feel responsibility, but you donīt have to, itīs your decision...the venetian beads I am working with from time to time, are usually in bad condition, with chips or breaks, most are "common", some more rare, and for each one I have to decide, if I make changes or not...for me these reworked beads are of course not longer original and I would not call them collectible, but they make their way as "wearable" and usually become part of a necklace for myself or friends...the images show some of the nicer ones...

Most of the old collectible beads, even if excavated, had owners before, who cherished and took care of them...did they felt responsibility or did they just kept them for their own beauty or their worth? Doesnīt matter for me, as long as I can view them, even with changes...:)

Thanks Fred! Mostly your questions kick my brain in a very nice way...:)

From my vantage (vintage?)point these Venetian beads are way more collectible after you reworked them than before!

-For me "collectable" is nothing to do with monetary value.
each collector sets their reason for collecting-
in my case i value highly certain beads even if damaged when they reveal how they are made, or information about their age or place of origin, or what they try to resemble, or specially if i've just never seen them before...