the larger beads are called what, are the smaller and the larger the same, other than the designs?
Hi Thomas,
The name "flush eye" is not a name, but rather a description that has been co-opted and turned into a name. Beck said that inserted eyes in glass beads might be either raised above the surface, or flush with the surface of a bead. NE archaeologists who recovered certain 17th C. trade beads remarked that these beads had "flush eyes." So it became their name. It were best discarded! The name has been misinterpreted by some to describe the type of eye. In other words, they thought that a "flush eye" was a specific cane pattern, rather than that it referred to fusion level/placement. These are just a few of the problems that bad names incite, and that are caused by people who don't understand naming practices.
The 17th C. beads usually called "flush eyes" are paternoster beads (another confusing name/origin). This means they were composed by the beadmaking Guild called the Paternostrieri, who mainly, at that time, made larger beads (such as MIGHT be found in a Catholic rosary as the "our father" beads). But more specifically, the beads they made at this time were essentially a speo beads, derived from canes of glass, placed on a spit, and rounded. In the instance of the present beads, the work was most likeey pursued at a lamp (so, not furnace work, but lampwork), and the preformed inserts were added while the beads were plastic. These inserts are pieces of patterned cane, with various types of designs, including "eyes" (concentric layers), striped eyes (concentric layers with an external row of stripes), and stars (molded layers comparable to star canes for chevron beads).
In the 19th century, similar-looking beads were produced by the Suppialume—the Guild of beadmakers that branched off from the Paternostrieri, and exclusively made lampwork beads. These beads are wound, and individually made and decorated. They made some plain wound beads into which were inserted mosaic-glass cane elements. The result is a "sparse millefiori bead." THIS is what you are showing today.
These late trade beads should not be confused with early Paternoster beads, and do not share their name (even though it's a bad name anyway).
You have acquired some unusual specimens!
Be well. Jamey
Thank you for the in depth explanation! I wonder if we have ever seen one of the A speo method with insert type here on the forum, I can't recollect!
Hi Thomas,
I intended to mention that.
The 17th C. a speo beads are seen occasionally from several parts of the world. Not only from NE N America, but also from S America (Peru), W Africa, and the Middle East.
In West Africa, they are what inspired powderglass imitations, made in Mauritania, and called (by some collectors) "Oalata beads."
In any event, I have shown these beads a number of times—though not lately. I'll see what images I can pull up....
Jamey
Here's a bead from Peru, dating from the (early?) 17th C. It's an a speo bead made from a white cane with wide blue stripes, and with three millefiori insets. Courtesy of my friend Ruth Shine.
I'll show some others as I come across the images.
Jamey
Here is one I came across, a blue bead with white specks and concentric ring 'eyes'. Any ideas?
I'd say not powder glass, this one could be a drawn bead.
Jamey, Thomas, Charles... here is a bead I found in 2004, on a mixed strand of Islamic era beads and early chevrons. It's a small seven layer chevron with inset cane slices. Don't you think the cane slices look just like Charles' he just posted?? Anyway, I have never seen one like it, this old of a chevron with the inset murrine. Does anyone else have similar examples???
I have four photos so will do this in two posts. At the time I bought it JP was interested in seeing it, so I still do owe him a closer look in person.
Joy B.
Here are two other views of this bead.
Joy B.
