Thanks. However I wonder just how small a perforated object has to be before its not considered a bead. I've come across tiny Neolithic beads from Irish sites, some with a diameter of 4mm and others with a perforation of 1mm or less. These have been found in association with bone beads, stone pendants and bone tubular spacers etc - but does their size mean they are not really beads? If so what should they be called? I have also recorded some fairly large tubular stone beads (unprovenanced) - and can't imagine how they could have been strung or worn comfortably.

but both could be considered personal adornment. I think of gorgets as large, two hole pendants, whether that's right or wrong. Some of the large beads were originally intended to be worn by domesticated animals such as camels or horses but people do wear them. Charlottes, which are tiny glass seed beads are readily available in size 13 and can also be found several sizes smaller. A size 13 seed bead generally means that 13 beads lined up on thread would measure one inch. The Japanese cylinder beads come in a size that is just about 1mm in diameter and their perforations are, of course, smaller. OTOH, there are modern artisan beads that are, IMHO, unwearable but the intent was that they were to be worn.
I've attached a picture of a bead that I don't consider wearable because of size (5") and fragile elements(with apologies to the artist, Lewis Wilson) and a link to a catalog page that shows numerous seed beads.
Gradstu, be careful entering this world of beads as they are addictive--but in a good way.
Juel

The beads this purse is made of are 1,4 mm. in diameter.

Size is relative I suppose but some of these Neolithic beads are very small and manufactured using stone tools, like microlith drills. They can date to as early as 3,700BC in Ireland although obviously there are far older beads than that. Have added a pic of fairly typical stone pendants from Irish Neolithic Passage Tombs - commonly known as pestle or hammer pendants, and two stone beads.

I have to agree with Nishedha 4mm is large, I posted the image below a few months back, below is the description.

I also knew an American bead maker John Christensen Indian name "Keokuk" who prided himself in the fact that he made HISHI(flat faced beads), in very small diameters, if I remember correctly his hole size was less than .5mm, he would string the beads in ten to twenty strands for his necklaces ........ Truly amazing ...... Truly beautiful. I attached an image of ear rings by John I just found on Ebay notice there are five strands on each ear ring and I would guess the ear wire is 20 guage .032 inch so the bead size looks like it would be about 1.5mm

I think there is no size limit (small) for beads to be called beads, if you can put a hole in it and then a thread through the hole I'd call it a bead.

FROM EARLIER POSTING
The image below is a choker I used to wear, all beads on this choker are beads found on ant hills, the smallest forty one came from the ant hill mentioned above. They measure from 1.72mm to the largest at 2.96mm.I personally have made beads of this size and smaller, I have modern tooling, they did not.

All my best ... Danny

Dear GS,

Very small beads are often called "micro-beads." Typically, these are small drawn beads, made exactly like any typical beadwork-beads, except the cane was drawn to an even thinner diameter.

I cannot agree with Juel that a size 13 bead means that thirteen beads strung together would equal about one inch. If only life (and beads) were so simple. Seedbead sizes are specific to the industry that makes them, and each industry uses a different sizing system. I don't know of a numbering/sizing system that has any relation to measurements. Since only the UK (and greater empire) and US use the inch as a standard of measurement, there would be some suggestion that a company that sells beads gauged by numbers (a certain number per inch) would be an English or American company. But, I believe this (in this instance "size 13 beads") is the Venetian system. (Or failing that, it's Czech—but I think the former.)

A size 13 seedbead is pretty small, but many folks routinely use size 16 and 18 beads—and these are preferable for work that is to be considered intricate—demanding a real investment of time and skill. Nevertheless, size 20 and 22 seedbeads are well-known, and some people create impressive work using them. I have known people who just collect them, to have them. I have done a few projects using 20s and 22s, but not many. ( What I have just composed is based on my practical experience, having discussed this many times with my Sioux friend, Jo Allyn—and thus presents my understanding from a Native American point of view—from the days when we did a lot of beadwork together.) I have some seedbeads that are SO SMALL, I don't know what number they would be given. I know these to be called "sand-beads." I have not attempted to string any of the sand-beads I own (yet).

I only know of two industries that make micro-beads—these being Venice and India.

A basic problem of trying to use micro-beads in any sort of construction is two-fold. 1) since most seedbead work (beadwork) is performed using a needle, one has to have a needle that is fine enough for the beads to pass over it, onto the line that is used. Finding a needle for size 20 and 22 beads can be a challenge. 2) Then, the issue of an appropriate line comes into play. The thread has to be super-fine, but also dependable (not subject to easy breakage). Until about ten years ago (or so) the most likely line would have been silk, or nylon thread that has been broken down. (Meaning a three-ply thread, taken apart, and individual lines from it used alone. I take lines apart frequently—so if this seems like an odd suggestion, it isn't to me.) Not only must the thread be thin enough to pass through the eye of the needle, but also thin enough so that when doubled, the beads can still pass over the needle AND the eye where it holds the doubled thread. This is a very limiting proposition. In recent years, some remarkable lines have become available—perhaps the most intriguing one (for fineness and strength) being Fireline.

I can see from replies to my earlier post about bead sizes, that one thing I wrote has been misinterpreted (!!). Please allow me to clarify.

I was discussing whether a perforated object should be considered a "bead" or not. And I remarked that a perforated object that is too small to be seen is probably not to be considered a "bead." My point directly relates to the fact that beads, as objects of personal adornment, are of sizes that conform to their function—essentially, that of being worn on the body to serve as decorations. This is something we may want to consider WHEN we are confronted with an object that may or may not be a bead. If a thing is MADE to be a bead, it IS a bead. Beads are made by beadmakers. However, if we are considering ALL perforated objects we can find in the world, and if we are thinking about what they are, MANY (gazillions) are not "beads." And, when referring to the human body, I mean the prospect of wearing these objects, but also the prospect of actually having to string them—this being normally accomplished by-hand.

On a microscopic level, there are gazillions of tiny lifeforms called "diatoms," that have (let's call them) "skeletons" called "frustules." These are amazing structures, in such a broad variety of shapes, it would be very difficult to classify them, even into—like—100 categories. But MANY of these shapes are perforated—and consequently, diatomaceous frustules are exactly like remarkable microscopic beads. But, they are not beads (because they are much too small to serve as that for the typical human usage, of stringing perforated objects together).

Danny wrote, "I think there is no size limit (small) for beads to be called beads, if you can put a hole in it and then a thread through the hole I'd call it a bead." I have to agree. I was thinking about things that are TOO SMALL to be beads, because they are too small to string, and even too small to see.

So, GS, when you ask "... I wonder just how small a perforated object has to be before its not considered a bead"—my response is that the micro-beads and sand-beads mark the place where the line is drawn. It's not that it's impossible to use these..., but it is very difficult (even if done occasionally by certain people, who challenge themselves to do that).

I suppose someone could take a million frustules and some space-age line, and (using a microscope) string them together to create the smallest necklace in the world (or the universe?)..., but this exception is not going to change the commonplace nature of normal everyday life. And let us not forget, at all times, I am making generalizations that speak to normal, average, or commonplace situations—since this is what makes these generalizations valid. But if we want to talk about the unheard-of-but-possible, everything changes, and all bets are off.

As I remarked earlier, in making a determination as to what is quantifiably a "bead" or not, this rests first on size, in relation to the human body. There are other considerations too, of course.

Jamey

have traditionally been threaded onto fine linen (called "Cut Garnet" in the 1900's instruction books I have) and were always sold and handled in threaded hanks. Some of the old pattern instructions also tell you to firm up and trim the tapering end of the thread fibres to a point with brown gum or glue so its stiff enough to push through very tiny bead holes.
Stefany

Hi Stef,

Thanks for your interesting reply. Industries that make and sell glass seedbeads usually either sell them loose or strung. Selling beads strung (as in strings, or hanks of strings) has the advantage of being convenient (for the seller and the user), and of demonstrating that individual beads are well-formed (because one can see this) and well-perforated (because someone has already succeeded in getting it onto a line). Loose beads, sold in packets or bags may tend to have individuals that are misshapen and imperforate—to say nothing of possibly being poorly sized. But this can be offset by a cheaper price, because the makers are not paying a staff to string the beads—though it may demand that the user buy more beads than necessary to counter the percentage of beads that will be deemed unusable.

Nevertheless, I would like to see a hank of strung microbeads, as made for sale to a buyer.

I'm not familiar with "cut garnet" and was not aware of any really fine linen being manufactured for such tiny work. Possibly because it's not done here in the US, or even anywhere in my lifetime. Is it still made in the UK or somewhere in Europe?

A number of times in my career, I have tried to use glue to stiffen a thin line, to substitute for using a needle. My experience has been that the glue itself makes the line too thick to be run through the beads I'm trying to string. So that is not an approach I would take.

My strategy has been to MAKE needles for the purpose I need. Consequently, I have made needles that I believe are small enough to pass through any bead ever made. (At least, this is what I say in my classes. Technically, as I have admitted, I have not actually attempted to string any sand-beads yet!) But, since I make needles that are about as thin as a human hair, I am reasonably confident I could string some sand-beads onto Fireline, if I were moved to do that.

By the way, early in my career, I strung LOTS of beads without any sort of needle, via the trim and wet-with-saliva method, or using bees' wax. I still routinely wax the ends of lines I'm using to keep them from fraying, whether they are used with a needle or not.

Jamey

Jamey, in giving the 13 strung SEED beads to the inch, I was intentionally speaking in very general terms (that match the common description used by seed bead sellers) just to give GS an easy-to-picture idea of how small those beads are.
Juel

Dear Juel,

I do not doubt that many people say this and similar things about bead sizes and sizing systems. However, these are mistaken ideas.

Seedbeads get grouped by size via sifting or screening. At Venice, they traditionally have a series of screens, one atop the other, with finer and finer screens as the beads drop down. The beads that remain in any particular screen become beads of that size. The numbers (if they refer to anything tangible—as opposed to abstract) probably refer to the screen used. (I'm guessing.)

Beadworkers would LIKE there to be some reasonable system of numbering that tells us what the size of the beads is (in relation to something or some standard we can grasp and understand). However, there is really no such thing. Beads are numbered from largest to smallest (in their category), with larger beads having small numbers, and smaller beads having larger numbers. The same thing happens with threads/fibers/yarns, appliances for using them (needles, hooks, etc.), with wire, and probably anything that is made in a variety of descending/assending sizes. It is a manufacturer's convenience.

By the way, as I use the following words, this is a convention I find useful. A "seed bead" is a bead made from a seed. A "seedbead" is a very small bead, also called a "beadwork-bead," typically made from glass by the drawn method (though at some points in time they have been wound—even very tiny ones). The name "seedbead" comes to us from an English convention of comparing things, and tangibly from such conventions as "seed pearl" and "seed coral"—these being popular embroidery elements over the past 500 years (or longer). Seed pearls and seed corals are so small, they are "like seeds." Seedbeads are so small, they are like seeds. However, since beads are actually made from seeds (probably encompassing the entire history of humanity, and in virtually every part of the world), it is helpful to have a name that does not imply a botanical origin, or that can be used to distinguish.

Be well. Jamey

I can't remember where I heard or read the lore that seed bead size designations relate to how many string into a 20mm length. But that doesn't work out quite right either. I just sat down and tried it out with some varying sizes of Czech beads.

I used to do a lot seed beading in the 80s. I still have my Czech size 12 tricuts, which are my all-time favorites. Quite a few others are still kicking around here too.

Some work requires that the beads match very closely. There is some variation of size and shape between manufacturers, too.

I never used below size 15, and the only time I used something that small was when I wanted a tiny loop at the bottom of a fringe.

Jamey - a General Bead job lot pile I wish I'd bought samples of when they had them - a large stash of 19th c. Italian microbeads - back then we just called them "tinies"! They were on linen thread, some rotting, in old yellowed rotting paper with Italian writing. They were priced by the gram. The colors were just irreplaceably beautiful. I bought just a couple of colors. Sizes were ranging from about 15 to 22. Garden of Beadin' in Garberville eventually bought the remaining pile about 15 years ago - I am sure all are in beader's stashes by now.

Snazzycat makes an attempt at a beads-per-inch chart....

Here's a necklace that, initially, may look like knotted or twisted cords. However, it is actually a three-strand twisted necklace of black micro-beads from India. We see it here in life size, as well as highly enlarged so individual beads can be seen. This is pretty remarkable.

I have this necklace courtesy of my friend Torben Sode, who acquired it in India, and gave it to me some years ago. (Thanks Torben!)

Jamey

You don't say how 'large' you mean but they could have been loom weights in what are called "warp-weighted looms". The weight on each thread of the warp keeps the needed tension on the threads.

You can find more on this subject in a web search.

Best wishes,
Snap

In my opinion anything that can be threaded longways or to dangle downwards can be a bead, it can even be a jewellery bead. Other items with holes can become beads by how they are used.
My home is bedecked with strands of beads some of which are individually far too large for a person to wear but they adorn furniture knobs, doors, mirrors, chair backs, windows, bedposts, and I have an assemblage of original monster size antique carved french Rosaries that make wonderful wall jewellery.

You could even say that a saxophone hung around the neck is a pendant bead as even when not blown it is still a badge of office showing the occupation of the wearer, thus his status in the community.

In my books: Beads! (1988) and The Bead Jewellery book (1997) (Both published in UK originally by David&Charles) I show necklaces threaded with doorkeys, kitchen jewellery made with small plastic funnels and kettle scale collectors, decorative strands of dried spices, chicken bones, antique beachcombed pipestems and porcelain doll limbs, cork fishing-net floats, antique turned wood pull-handles, etc. Soap-on-a-rope, (oh yes, and "Plumbers beads" which we havent discussed for a while!)

Threadable components or beads are traditionally made in various parts of the world out of beetle legs, feathers, porcupine quills, crab claws, all sorts of small fossils, woven human hair, felt balls, and even bezoar stones, -sometimes found in the stomachs of animals and believed to be lucky and protect against poisons, and ephemeral materials such as newspaper, fresh flowerheads, sealing wax, beeswax, scented compositions, sweets/candies, straw, corncobs or fishscales.

So happy hunting "Gradstu" in Ireland... (do we already know each other by any chance?)
from Stefany Tomalin in London, UK
(founder member, Bead Society of Great Britain)

Your non-academic, refreshing, matter-of-fact approach to the question is warmly appreciated.
I also think a bead is 100% a bead when holed.
I also think an element, per se not a bead, turns into one when threaded, strung.