In the arena of ancient glass beads in Indonesia:
In antiquity Middle Eastern glass beads passed into Eastern Asia via Island SE Asia. Although it has been said that they were "inbolved" in the Spice Trade, it is likely that beads were not "traded for spices," but rather were perks. Beads were given or included when deals were made. Consequently, we will find Middle Eastern glass beads in ISEA.
At some point, we can surmise, Middle Eastern glassmakers/glassworkers emigrated to ISEA, and took up working there. (I suppose there were too many people working glass in the ME, and decisions were made to "cut out the middlemen," and go to the regions where beads had become popular. This happened similarly in Scandinavia as well.) Emigrant glassworkers then made beads that were essentially the same as those they made at home. (Technically speaking. It is possible and likely that local glassmaking differed from ME glass, in terms of raw materials. My comments relate to techniques and styles.)
Then, as happens over time, those glassworkers evolved into their own idiom of beadmaking. Their new products harkened back to those of previous generations, but also had specific differences. The two main types of jatim, millefiori beads and combed beads have antecedents in ME beads; but differ from them in being derived from hot-pinched decorated cane (or cane-like) constructions—whereas ME beads were much more often individually-made, being wound or rolled-pad beads. Nevertheless, we can see remarkable similarities if we compare components; i.e. the actual millefiori canes.
All this is explained in my book, Magical Ancient Beads (1998). It is my opinion that there are, essentially, three classes of beads in Indonesia (and wherever these beads were traded to) that are: 1) Middle Eastern beads, 2) Javanese-made beads that are like ME beads; and 3) the unique jatim that evolved from ME bead styles.
To answer Linda's question, the green/yellow mosaic-glass beads could be either types 1) or types 2). One may wonder if a chemical analysis would distinguish between them (?). By the way, most of these beads are hot-pierced beads—being derived from solid mosaic-glass cane pieces, that were heated and pierced. Some are pierced longitudinally and some across thir girths.
Jamey
Your book is a rare and expensive item these days! I'll try to get hold of a copy.
Cheers, and Happy New Year!
This picture show modern made beads (2006) from East Java.
But in the 90's there was already skill to make nice new beads!
Caution is advised, but do not judge on pictures only.
As I remarked previously, Javanese bedmakers reached critical-mass for reproducting ancient beads in a more-authentic manner in the early 2000s. I saw the first hot-pinched millefiori beads, imitating jatim, in 2001.
It also happened that in the late '90s I saw the first "Javanese" millefiori piece, at the Folk Art and Craft Museum in Los Angeles—shown to me by the store manager, who was a friend (now deceased). This was not a bead. It was a paperweight, and had been made using typical-looking blue-&-white eye canes. However, I was told it was fabricated by an Anglo man in Java. So it was not produced at a Javanese-manned factory.
Nevertheless, just the fact that actual millefiori work was being produced in Java caused me to anticipate that locally-made more-authentic beads would be offered eventually. And this turned out to be true just a few years later. These included wound individually-made beads with sparse millefiori decoration. (I have some.) Followed by actual hot-pinched beads—that realistically mimic ancient jatim.
My article for the Istanbul Bead Conference (2007) shows specimens of these beads, and describes the progress of the Javanese industries. And, of course, the two long photo essays from my trip in 2008, posted here at the Forum, are revealing.
By 2006, your beads would have been commplace, in terms of the changes in manufacturing.
But in the '90s, beadmakers were still making torchwork wound beads with trailed decorations. Yes, they were "nice beads." But they were very different from mosaic-glass beads.
Jamey
Another curious bit of recent history:
In 2008, when I went to Bali and Java (copiously shown here in two long dialogues), I brought with me copies of my papers from the Istanbul Conference of the previous year. One of these was about how imitations of old and ancient beads have become misrepresented in the current bead marketplace. I gave copies of these papers to several people in the bead business.
Fast-forward to 2010:
After attending the first Borneo Bead Conference at Miri in Sarawak, I returned to Bali and Java, to further pursue the fieldwork I had begun two years earlier. I was surprised to find that several beads and pendants, shown in my 2007 paper, were then being copied in Java (!). I was even more surprised when the chap I had given the reprints to, who showed me the new copies, did not acknowledge that these beads and pendants were derived from the paper I gave him. (He is directly connected to the beadmakers in Jember, and facilitated my going to Jember to meet these beadmakers a few days later.) Some of these elements were copied but altered-in-style. What had been an imitation of a Phoenician head pendant had been morphed into a Buddha head pendant. And, of course, I acquired specimens of this stuff too.
Jamey
It is truly getting difficult to assert authenticity from photographs! I'll attach some more detailed images to show (perhaps) more subtlety in the glass.
The beads were purchased in a shop called The Acacia Tree in KL. It was (I believe) a reputable shop and one I visited to handle and learn about beads and textiles. The owner was patient!
It is good to know when and where and how copies of and tributes to ancient beads are made. We seem to be in an age where just about anything can be replicated.
Cheers!
