We see, all too often, the terms "Warring States", "Ancient", "Roman", "Islamic", "authentic", "antique" etc...etc...etc....none of which should be used in describing any of these beads.....

3,000 BC, Dragon Veins, Tibetan dZi......the list of misrepresentative terms is never ending.......how many unsuspecting buyers have spent $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.....?

Most of the beads being misrepresented would sell in their own right, some are absolutely beautiful!!!!! I just get sick when some sellers need to hyper-inflate the prices using untrue descriptive terms.....

Venetian Fancies, dZi beads, ancients, Kiffas, Chevrons......all, plus many many more are currently being misrepresented on........

Phoenician Head Beads or pendants, Roman face beads......my favorites the Mauritanian powder glass Kiffa beads.....all are being copied currently, most are sold for what they truly are, some are not!!!

These are wound and NOT powder glass.....

These are, of course, removed by unscrupulous sellers

Are the new Indonesian pseudo-Kiffa wrapped with a raffia-like material, perhaps to emulate an item from West Africa? If there is a reasonable resemblance, it fosters the misrepresentation just that little bit more...

Hello PK,

All glass beads are classified beginning with how they are made—because most of the time the structure of a bead is more-or-less discernible, and differences are distinctive.

A wound bead is formed on a mandrel, from glass that is in a liquid or semi-liquid state, The structure of the resulting bead reflects that. The fabric of the glass can be seen to flow around the (now departed) mandrel. That is the aperture of the perforation. Wound beads have glass flow that follows the circumference of the bead (just as drawn beads have flow that progresses from one end to the other—because they are derived from drawn canes). Many wound glass beads may have bubbles or contaminations that likewise flow with the structure of the glass, around the circumference.

A powderglass bead is composed from glass that has been crushed in a cold hard state. This crushed glass is then used to construct a bead. Often there is a binding medium (that may be as simple as water or saliva). The resulting bead is either formed around a mandrel, or a sharp tool is inserted through it to form a perforation.

Taking a close look, a powderglass bead would never show the flowing fabric or structure of glass of a wound bead. The fabric of a powderglass bead is very distinct. Under magnification, you can actually SEE the granules of glass that make up a powderglass bead. A poked hole is very different from a hole that is created in winding.

Powderglass beads, generally, are not good imitations of wound beads. The reverse is true also. Wound beads are not good copies of powderglass beads.

I hope this is helpful. Jamey

Thank you Jamey, here are a few close-ups to help picture the differences....in all the shots the bead on the left side is wound and the right bead is powder glass....Thomas

I am also including the damaged powder glass beads, to make it easier to understand......hopefully....Thomas

Hi everyone,

Thank you Jamey for the explanation. You have always had the answer!
Thank you Thomas for the comparing pictures. I didn't see them at frist. I just thought it would be very useful if someone could post the pictures of both for comparison. And there you are, just like reading my mind. Thank you again.

Hi PK,

Your question is sort of vague.

The general name for any beads made from crushed glass is "powderglass" beads, The basic technique was devised in antiquity, and has similarities to the manufacture of molded faience artifacts (to which it was no doubt related). In Europe, making items from powdered glass has some tradition, and in the 19th and 20th centuries was routinely called by the French name "pate de verre." Nevertheless, this name, translated as "glass paste" or "paste di vetro," is ROUTINELY used to describe countless glass items that were merely conventionally made from hot glass. There is some stigma against glass as an "important" material..., and these writers seem to think that if you call the item "glass paste" it makes it more significant. It is very difficult to criticize and counter this rather silly (and antiquated) idea and presentation of glass. But this sort of thing is pandemic in the world of antiquities, and totally entrenched.

Glass is a versatile material, that can be used in many different ways. And there are a number of different ways these groups of techniques can be divided. Most industries that are proficient in glassworking use hot techniques—in which the glass is melted and manipulated.

But there are also cold techniques, or types of work that begin with room-temperature glass (even if heating is applied eventually). For instance, a chunk of glass can be worked just like a piece of stone—being chipped, grinded, "carved" (not really a correct word for glass), etched, polished, and finally drilled. This is usually characterized as "lapidary work." Several hundred years ago, the Chinese excelled in this work, at a time when they had little or no hot-working of glass. There is some expectation that folks who indulge in lapidary glassworking may not be technologically proficient enough to MAKE glass and to work it via typical hot techniques.

Likewise, when glass is reduced to powder (or crushed fragments), the people who pursue making artifacts are sometimes or often people who do not have the skills necessary to work melted glass in a hot state. Thus, lapidary and powderglass techniques are considered to be somewhat "primitive." Nevertheless, these techniques demand certain skills, a variety of techniques or ploys or manipulations, and the resulting beads (or whatever) can be complex and even beautiful. Some powderglass beadmaking ends with lapidary finishing (like polishing), resulting in a product that resembles a stone or precious material (like coral). So, this is not to say that "primitive" necessarily indicates an inferior product. It is more like these sets of skills are out of the norm within glassworking. And they can tend to be labor-intensive, and are pursued by folks who are willing to invest a lot of time into their work. But the work circumvents the melting and manipulation of glass, that includes its own sets of skills, techniques, and variations, and is considered by many to be the "natural" or "preferred" way to use glass as an art material.

Anyway, in several parts of the world there are industries that have indulged in both lapidary work and powderglass work, apart from the three countries in West Africa that routinely do it (and generally do not do, or do very little, hot work)—these being Mauritania, Ghana, and Nigeria. (Formerly, glass beads were also made in South Africa from recycled glass.) It is the Ghana beadmakers who make the greatest number of powderglass beads, in the most widely varied types and styles. The work of Mauritanians and Nigerians (very different from each other, and from many Ghana beads), are more limited in terms of techniques, but encompass many variations in shapes, sizes, and patterns.

I know of powderglass beads from Thailand, Borneo, and even from American Indian tribes a few hundred years ago, and possibly from South America around the time of European Contact.

Did you have a more specific question in mind?

Jamey

The Prosser method of beadmaking also relies on a concoction that is essentially powdered glass mixed with powdered dry clay. The mixture is used to charge a bead mold, and the resulting beads are fired.

These fit into the general category of beads made from crushed glass.

Prosser beads were made in Czechoslovakia, France, possibly other European countries (but not Italy or Holland). Machines for making Prosser beads were sold to a firm in Morocco about fifteen to twenty years ago. So now Czech-style Prosser beads can come to us from out of Morocco as well. However, the majority of such beads would be European in origin.

JDA.

Hi Jamey,

Thank you for taking time to answer my question even though my question is so vague! I just confused between crushed glass and powder glass, I guess. However; after I read your reply, I have to say to myself Oh my god there are so many things about the beads to learn. Actually I just want to know that there is another kind of powder glass beads beside Kiffa .( I saw pics somewhere how to make Kiffa ) If you could show me the specimen , I will be appreciated.

Thanks again Jamey. You are the best !
Best regards,
Pk

I have stated a number of times that the mixture used to make Prosser beads is "clay combined with ground glass." Actually, this is how glassy porcelain is made.

The mixture used for making Prosser beads includes feldspar. In the fusion of the beads, the feldspar melts and becomes glassy. The result is about the same, were actual ground glass included, but technically what I wrote was misstated.

In the interest of accuracy.

JDA.

as if we need to be reminded again....

Hi Thomas..
brilliant stuff!
Can you tell me where the strand of pseudo fancies hail from please?
Thanks
S

Hey ya all, some of these fakes are actually beautifully done! Love the fancies, Hate the Kiffas! If, they were priced acordingly as new reproductions, I would buy! Thanks Thomas for a very interesting post!

I found them at a New York swap meet for REAL cheap!!!

Chinese.....some of these get quite scary when they age them....

These types are currently being hyped as Islamic period....made in Indonesia....sold mostly as old by Thai dealers....

with and without artificial aging....

Remember all the beads I have posted here are new production currently to be found around the globe...these types are all being sold as ancient, antique or vintage....if a seller is pushing these as something they are not, there are at least two explanations: first the seller is ignorant and is the victim of an unscrupulous wholesaler/dealer himself and in turn is passing this misinformation on to the next buyer in line.....or the seller is a greedy thief who knowingly misrepresents in order to increase his $$$ at the expense of an uninformed buyer.....either way we should let these sellers know that there is a website trying to curb this fraud......Thomas

You have a great group of new repros.

First, here's a comparison between a lovely genuine Roman mosaic face bead (on the left) from our friend Yankee, approx. 100 bc - 100 ad, and a new replica of the very same bead type (on the right). It is thought that these new replicas are being made in the middle east. This particular repro was sold on eBay in May for 200.00, represented as a genuine Roman mosaic face bead. Anyone involved with ancients knows that a price of 200.00 is for none other than a replica, and if repped as ancient, then it's clearly a fake.

Why judge something as fake just because its inexpensive?

All my collection, with only a very few exceptions were purchased -or perhaps I should say discovered - for sale in the field so to speak, at low prices from non-specialist antique dealers who arent interested in beads. I take little notice of whatever they say it is, unless its really funny!
My unique millefiori with the word "Africa" for example, shown on the cover of one of the Picards volumes was found on a mixed string which cost me no more than about £45.- (=$80) I paid a similar amount more recently for a funny cobbled-together tourist necklace that had a Byzantine glass "Cross of Constantine" oddly mounted as a pendant, and so on.
Even in actual auctions the mixed bagfuls that appear insignificant may include one really worth-it bead!

Its the detective-like aspect of collecting beads which I find so satisfying and interesting!

Stefany

Tt's alright being the 'bead detective' if you have confidence and steady nerves!

Hi Barbara

Yes... but it doesnt even matter if its some real thing or not if you havent shelled out a fortune.

If someone is building up a complete collection then they may feel compelled to spend top money for beads, but then the motive might partly be investment for future needs, which is a different sort of gain from the fun of accumulating lots of unusual things and then finding out their stories.
If you are a big spender, word gets around among the dealers. I'd rather they just think of me as a bit daft.

For most of us we enjoy the challenge and the risk and learn a lot along the way.

Stefany

Hi Stefany,

"Why judge something as fake just because its inexpensive?

I did not say that everything cheap is fake, obviously from the image posted I provided visual comparison between a genuine and a fake. And, while I would love to find an ancient Roman face bead in a 2.00 junk bag at a flea market, I know the probability is very, very slim. I too know how to hunt under-represented beads at junk sales and do it on a regular basis, finding good beads for pennies on the dollar. The fake face bead pictured was sold by a professional dealer in the U.K. And, I only refer to a bead as fake when it is misrepresented as genuine.

Hi Stefany,

I do not believe Joyce has offered a suggestion that price is a sole determinant in authenticating a bead.

I would imagine that she—and anyone—understands that it is always possible for a bead to be offered for a fraction of its value, if not recognized by the seller as being worth more. Finding such a bargain is something we all might hope to experience at one time or another.

Nevertheless, a truism that I promote at any appropriate time is this:

An unscrupulous seller will OFTEN try to sell a fake at a price that is higher then the actual value of the bead, but MUCH LOWER than the value if the bead were authentic.

As an example, A Roman Period face bead might be worth $3000. A copy of this bead might be worth $30. The unscrupulous seller will try to get $300—thus making ten times the actual value of the item, all the while making it appear that he/she is letting it go at a great loss.

THIS is what should make any potential buyer see a RED FLAG. Beads that seem to be offered at a severely reduced price are often misrepresented fakes. In the instance you are discussing, there is no overt misrepresentation—clearly—because the seller prices the bead low because he/she does not recognize it as valuable.

It is not a suggestion that there are no bargains on the horizon. And, this is only one step in determining likely misrepresentation and attempted fraud.

Jamey

to determine "worth" or "value"

Hi Steve,

This thread is getting too long and too removed from its original topic! Let's start some new lines of inquiry!

I am not entirely convinced, yet, that there are what I would call "revival" mosaic-glass face beads from the Islamic Period. ("Neo-Roman" is sort of nonsensical.)

It has been fairly well demonstrated that face beads were made as late as the Byzantine Period. And it is suspected that a late edition of face beads may have been produced. But the former are pretty rare, and the latter seem to be mostly from Southeast Asia. To characterize the SEA beads as either "Islamic" or "revival" beads may be a stretch. As far as I know, we have only the word of collectors that they are truly "ancient" beads. It is not impossible that these are basically recent forgeries. The jury is still out....

In the past few years, a variety of beads have surfaced that appear to be well-made technically accurate (that is, actual mosaic-glass) face beads—that are fakes. One was sold by a major auction house this last year, to a friend of mine. (I contacted the auction house, and they ignored my warning to them, and auctioned anyway.) Thomas has shown us the exact same bead (not the same specimen, but a different specimen of this edition of beadmaking).

Any face beads must be carefully examined and considered, and some are more suspect than others.

Jamey

Here are 3 lovely early 20th c. Venetian combed "feather" beads on the left, with 2 India-made versions from the late 20th - early 21st century on the right. For me, the frequent (but not always) matte finish and the white mandrel release powder in the perforations of the Indian beads tells the story. The Indian versions are also larger and less graceful.

Thank you again, Thomas, for showing this aspect of your collection.

Every bead I posted from my collection of "repros" is a great bead in its own right, I do not discourage buying these beads whatsoever, in fact I believe a true collector should have some of these for purely comparisons sake! I also think that owning these types allows one to "feel" the differences between the authentic and the reproductions.
Most of the beads I posted in this thread were bought as legit reproductions, although several were bought believing the sellers story.
I say that if you like it and can afford it, buy it!
I happen to think the newer repro Kiffas out of Indonesia are fantastic, mainly the smaller rounds on the strands not the triangles!
Happy hunting! Thomas

This was fascinating, and the examples & side-by-side comparisons were really helpful. Thank you for this hugely informative session.
And I agree, some of the "false oldies" are excellent beads in their own right.
Have you thought of writing a book on this? I would LOVE to have a reference like this on hand in my library!
Luann