In the following posts, I will show some of the ancient Egyptian artifacts I shot. We begin here with a group of molded, carved, and modeled items in faience and glass. The detail below shows two Phoenician Period head pendants, of the beardless late type (that are said by some to be boys, and by others to be women). Although the detail is fuzzy, I wanted to show the image anyway.

JDA.

This is an Egyptian mummy case, of the type that is probably painted gessoed wood. (It may be cartonage—I'm not terrific with technical terms in Italian, and didn't make many notes—plus the place was overrun with school kids that were a bit distracting....) It is the case of a woman, and we see the portion that presents her face and chest.

Below is a mosaic-glass fragment, representing an elaborate broad collar. This may have been made for a statue or figure, and not for a mummy. Oddly, the piece is shown upside-down. Remember, mosaic-glasses should not be confused with glass mosaics.

In the previous group of posts, I showed lots of examples of glass mosaics. In this art, small glass tesserae ("tess-er-eye"—usually square) are arranged together, and set in something like grout that holds it all together. In mosaic-glass, small (usually long) glass elements are arranged together, fused to become a single piece of glass, and then pulled ("drawn") to become miniaturized. The two approaches have in-common the possibility of creating recognizable shapes or abstract (geometrical, etc.) designs in glass. But the former is generally a large-scale and one-of-a-kind effort, whereas the latter is a miniature art that facilitates many similar reproductions of the design (buy removing slices from the resulting cane).

The eye has been among my most favorite symbols for as long as I can remember. If you ever receive a letter from me, it is sure to have a small drawing of an Eye of Horus on the back. I've been doing that since was was 16, and in love with Egyptian art.

Here's a handsome eye. It's one of a pair, but this shot excludes its other. The eyes are lifesize, and were probably made to be inlays for a statue.

JDA.

The upper shot here is a close-up of a mummy's chest, that is wearing a gold pectoral depicting a bird—probably an eagle.

The lower object is belt-like, and may be a bandoleer. That is, either worn around the waist, or slung over one shoulder and worn across the chest. The elements are rectangular glazed faience (or glazed steatite) double-perforated beads, with drop pendants that represent hieroglyphs—of the same material(s).

JDA.

These are two groups of small faience amulets, also representing hieroglyphs of the Egyptian language.

JDA.

In the Roman division, there are some quite wonder and impressive specimens of two of the most popular of ancient carved arts: the intaglio and cameo.

The techniques of making these objects should be thought of as each one reversing the other. An intaglio (pronounced "een-TAH-lyee-o") has been carved with a recessed image or design (and makes a good stamp impression, thereby becoming relief); while a cameo is a relief carving, and would not be used as a stamp.

The upper image shows a dark (brown) agate stone, like for a ring setting, depicting a man receiving a laurel crown. He may be an athlete, scholar, military victor, god, or who-knows-what. (Sorry this small piece is slightly fuzzy—but it's such a great object.)

The lower image shows a remarkable group of cameo-carved stones, depicting various scenes, in which the carver took great advantage of the different colored layers to make a visual contrast between the color of the background and figure(s).

JDA.

Again, though these images turned out less than sharp, the objects are so nice, I could not toss the photos. (I hope to shoot them again at a future time, perhaps.)

Both are great pieces, but the lower one depicting a chariot and horses in FIVE colors is quite remarkable.

JDA.

I close this section with a beautiful statue of a Greek goddess with snakes on her bodice.

That day, from 5 pm to 7 pm (closing time), Maggie, Aldo, and I looked through the Amber exhibit. I will begin to show amber specimens tomorrow.

Cheers, Jamey

Could what looked like agate be some of that very rare red Russian marble that was used to face a palace room I've forgotten the name of (in Russia)?

Thanks so much for the great mini-tour.

Snap

Hi Snap,

Which image? Marble is a softer stone than agate. And agate (or quartz family minerals) are the typical stones of intaglio and cameo carving—particularly at this period.

Among the mosaics I showed, from Sicily, occasionally a red stone called "porphyry" is used. It is on the slightly dark and violet end of red, and tends to be spotty. Some sources say porphyry is a "marble." Other insist it's "feldspar" or "quartz." My impression is that the stone if antiquity is softer than quartz. Lots of people used porphyry for decorative stonework. At Egypt, whole sarcophagi and big statues were carved from it.

Jamey

The Archaeology Museum at Naples is sponsoring a H U G E exhibit of ancient amber. They produced a very nice catalogue too, but it is only in Italian. I don't know if the show will travel to other locations. The specimens are mainly Italian, dating from as early as ca. 500 BCE, through the Roman Period. There might be a few that are earlier, and there are some that are later—but for the most part the amber comes from this region, from old tombs or old families.

The show is not just amber, but also presents various other types of objects recovered along with the amber. Objects such as pottery, glasswares, and bronzes. Some of this is also jewelry. I will show the stuff that I think ois interesting, when I have a photo that is acceptable.

In ancient times, Baltic amber was a significant trade product, taken down to the Mediterranean civilizations and farther abroad for thousands of years. By Roman times, the Romans actually created expeditions that went up to the Baltic, and brought the amber back. These trade routes and trends have been well researched.

Although we usually think of amber as being yellow (yellow tones that range from white to brown), in as few as 100 years, amber can turn (or begin to turn) dark and often red or reddish. Thus, many of the pieces I'm going to show here are red amber. Having recently written "there is very little natural cherry amber"—to see this much red amber is going to seem like a contradiction. However: 1) most of this amber was yellow in antiquity; and 2) it isn't red-red like the fakes that are passed-off as "cherry amber."

I'm not going to describe these pieces in any detail. Think of this as a feast of the eyes. We begin with two bronze ornaments that are decorated with a few amber beads. These are a pectoral and two bracelets.

Jamey

Jamey,
Thank you for the images of these lovely items. I am really enjoying this decorated bottle. Can you recall it's approximate size? I'm so glad that you had this adventure!

Jamey, I'm so surprized to see this red translucent Amber because it looks so much like the Cherry Amber that I have!

Hi Christine,

I have made a special point to show all of the amber specimens that are the most-red--because i think it is significant that people see them.

Nevertheless, if you were to see these things in real life, you would notice that the hue of these pieces is different from the typical fakes that abound in the bead marketplace. Their colors are a more tawny-red, and there is some variation in saturation and tone (and sometimes translucency and inclusions). The tone of fakes is generally strident and uniform. However, we can't expect that to always be true.

The specimens that are shown in this exhibit are very RARE pieces. They have largely been archaeologically recovered, and are often 1,000 years old or older. Their surfaces are crackled and organic-looking. These details may not always be evident from photographs.

Please let me assure you—in real life you would be able to visually distinguish between these authentic antiquities, and the plastic imitations that mostly postdate 1926.

Be well. Jamey

because sometimes, it is not easy to tell just by a photo! I appreciate ypur explanation!

- rather lovely, aren't they?

Thanks for letting us all perch on your shoulders, so to speak, as you take us to these wonderful places. Hope we're not too heavy!

This is a remarkable piece. There were three of these constructions, all similar in format. However at least one was all amber, and one or both of the others are mixed glass and amber beads. The pectorals seem to have been attached to the chest via a fibula. (A very odd arrangement, I think.) From the fibula, the beads hang in vertical rows, held together by wide bronze spacing plates. I would guess that these pieces have been reconstructed, from whatever parts remain. Each one has been placed on a rendering that shows what they think would have been the missing parts. So that's why you see pictures of beads next to actual beads.

Remarkable! But not yet the best to come.

JDA.

Looking at those pictures is a real treat. The eye beads look like the ones that are found in Mali, what do you think? Thank you Jamey

Hi Judy,

I'm glad you wrote this, because it's a clear example of what has been happening repeatedly for twenty-four years now. When the eye beads from Mali came to California, there was a stir that these were "Roman beads." I urged caution, because—while I recognized a similarity—I felt the beads were not really identical. I said "if you saw the Roman Period eye beads in real life, along with the Mali beads, you could tell they are not the same." But as late as 1987, when Lois Dubin presented the world with The History of Beads, the misidentification of the Mali beads continued and then exploded.

The beads from Mali derive from the Islamic Period. And they are millefiori beads. The ancient beads shown here with amber have stratified eyes. They are earlier than the Mali beads, and may even predate the Roman Period. I will take a look at the exhibit catalogue, and see what they have to say about the pectorals. My expectation is that the glass beads are Mediterranean, dating from ca 600 to 400 BCE. In other words, Phoenician Period beads from Egypt or "Syria." If they are from later (say, the Roman Period), they are still not millefiori beads and not the same as the Mali beads.

Jamey

Hi Judy,

The exhibit catalogue describes all of these elaborate pectorals as deriving from the sixth century BCE. So they are indeed as early as I supposed. It is true that the occasional but rare occurrence of Phoenician beads has been known to happen in West Africa. They are usually the aqua eye beads I showed from Sicily (above). So, let's understand. I do not insist that there are no glass beads in West Africa from Roman times and EARLIER times. Phoenician beads ARE known—but they are very rare. Since the Phoenicians are known to have founded cities like Carthage IN North Africa, it would be odd if there were not Phoenician glass beads that made their way down into lower West Africa. How recently they migrated is anyone's guess. It might be within the last 100 years, for all we know.

The point I stress is that actual Roman Period glass beads have not been demonstrated to appear among the assemblages of ancient West African beads—and that the beads that may be so-identified are mistakenly identified. The typical eye beads from Mali derive from Islamic Period assemblages, and are of millefiori manufacture.

Nevertheless, we have a new issue to include in the fracas. Over the past five years or so, MANY African bead merchants have been traveling to the Middle East, returning with ancient and "ancient" Middle Eastern beads. These beads are now being sold as "African" beads—and usually "from Mali." They include specimens that were entirely unknown from Africa from before five years ago (in my experience). Some of these will be Roman Period beads, no doubt. Not all are ancient. Quite a few Middle Eastern FAKES also get into bead inventories now. We've had several posts on this topic in recent years.

[This is very parallel to our situation here in the US. Beginning in the 1970s, MANY trade beads were brought from Africa to the US—whereupon they were sold to us as "American Indian trade beads," which they were not. Now, thirty years later, this same problem still occurs, and eBay and similar sites are rampant with these fraud exchanges. Plus, many of the beads are now NEW beads. I have followed all this over the past eight years, ever since I began using eBay.]

The fallout from this is that NOW we may never know what is truly "African" unless there is indisputable archaeological evidence. The inventories of bead peddlers are no longer of any real help.

Jamey

This is the pectoral that includes only amber beads. The deatil was shown in the previous post.

JDA.

This piece may be related to the previous, since it appears to have a bronze ornament and a variety of glass beads. This specimen has not been restrung, and the beads are very different. Most have stripes that have been tooled into waves or zigzags, and the occasional curlycue.

JDA.

Jamey,

Really remarkable, both the exhibit and your generous contribution of photos.

Do you know if the faces were molded or otherwise hot-worked, rather than strictly carved?

Hi Snap,

It is not really practical to try to mold amber—so we can be reasonably certain the faces are carved.

One of the things that distinguishes amber from other natural resins is its high melting point and volatility. If you melt amber, it does not turn into a liquid (like any recent resin would do). Instead, at best, it becomes a hot gummy sticky material. Then, the temperature to get it to this state must be carefully modulated. A few degrees too low and the amber is still stiff. A few degrees too high, and it catches fire.

This is how we can be reasonably certain that in earlier times, people did not melt amber to make "pressed amber" or "ambroid," prior to the sophisticated development of the Germans in 1881. 19th century technology, relying on thermometers, heating chambers, and hydraulic presses, were able to do this work. Suggestions that 'anyone' could have pressed amber—be these folks in antiquity, or modern but mechanically unsophisticated folks—is presumptuous. But it's a mistake that has been made many times. It's all predicated on the lack of understanding that amber doesn't melt.

Even when pressed amber is made in the present time, the gooey melted mess is quickly centrifuged and pushed into a mold (making rods, plates, or blocks), and is then cooled. Once it's cool and firm, the ambroid is cut and carved into ornaments. Consequently, when we see a bead or artifact of "amber" that has casting or mold marks, we know it's not real amber, and not even real pressed amber. The places that make real pressed amber are: Germany, Poland, and Russia.

I appreciate your kind remarks!

Jamey

While a great deal of ancient amber tends to turn red or reddish, the occasional bead or groups of elements can remain yellow, or will have developed a yellow patina. The previous specimens and these illustrate this unusual phenomenon well.

JDA.

....and explanations - thank you, Jamey.

What's the date of those two amber face beads with the elaborate hair (right out of the 1960s)? And how large are they?

One of the many things that impressed me is how well the pectorals are displayed, with the ghost images of the beads that are no longer there to give us a sense of what the whole effect must have been. If only other museums would learn from this.

Will

Hi Will,

The Catalogue identifies these as recovered in 1957, and believed to date to the 5th C. CE. They are 4.5 and 4.8 cm long. The "hair" looks more like a head wrap in the catalogue. These pieces are described as being tutuli (singular "tutulus"), which apparently indicates a belt ornament worn by a woman.

You say "'60s-like." My first impression was "Deco-like." They remind me, somehow, of the hood ornaments of classic cars from the '30s. Very cool pieces, whatever they are.

And yes, it's true, the whole exhibit is beautifully laid out. My one complaint, as a photographer, was that many specimens are placed in a dark box with a light shining up through them. This is very beautiful in real life..., but makes available-light photography quite hit-or-miss.

More to come....

Jamey

Two of three schematic figures, showing the placement of ornaments in situ.

JDA.

Jamey, was this carved of quartz crystal, or made of glass? Very delicate looking, and embellished with gold? Do you remember approx. size?

Thank you so much for your generosity here - the time and thought it takes to share so many images and experiences is truly appreciated!

Hi Joyce,

It's carved quartz. It is the sort of thing that glass artisans hoped to imitate for the regular populace when they developed techniques to decolorize glass and create vessels. And I believe it is encrusted with gold. It is not big. Maybe seven or eight inches tall. (I'll check this.)

I'm glad you have enjoyed the images. I still have lots more to show. We're about half way there.

Jamey

The gift of effort on your part, Jamey, to photograph, share, document; it's very much appreciated and enjoyed.

Small articulated constructions.

With this short strand of amber pendants and beads, we come to the end of the Amber Exhibit.

In a separate post, I will begin to discuss the rest of my trip to Italy and Turkey, later.

Jamey

This is what this forum does better than any other on the web relating to beads!
It is the next best thing to being there, better at times, (when you're there you don't get Jamey's narrations)!
What a great field trip I just went on, Thank you again Jamey for taking the time and sharing your images, thoughts and knowledge!
Thomas

thank you Jamey for the show !
http://www.pbase.com/thengan/image/82236213
Tibor