Penn Museum Middle East Galleries Volume 40.4

40_4_UPenn-Middle-East-Galleries-Banner.jpg
BRICK FOOTPRINT, circa 2100 - 2000 B.C. This print of a human foot was discovered on an ancient mud brick used in construction at the royal city of Ur (modern-day Iraq), and is now placed at the entrance to the Penn Museum’s Middle East Galleries.  All photographs courtesy of the Penn Museum.   QUEEN PUABI NECKLACE of gold and lapis lazuli with central floral design, 2450 B.C. 

BRICK FOOTPRINT, circa 2100 - 2000 B.C. This print of a human foot was discovered on an ancient mud brick used in construction at the royal city of Ur (modern-day Iraq), and is now placed at the entrance to the Penn Museum’s Middle East Galleries. All photographs courtesy of the Penn Museum. 
QUEEN PUABI NECKLACE of gold and lapis lazuli with central floral design, 2450 B.C. 

It starts with a single footprint. Impressed some four thousand years ago by an anonymous Sumerian into a mud brick in the royal city of Ur, and recovered there a century ago, this mark makes a simple declaration, but one that lies at the heart of all human culture: “I was here.” The first object the visitor encounters upon entering, it is an apt beginning to the story that unfolds across the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology’s newly renovated and expanded Middle East Galleries, which opened to the public on April 21.

Click Image to Enlarge

Top to bottom, left to right: RAM IN A THICKET STATUETTE of gold, lapis lazuli, copper, shell, red limestone, and bitumen, one of a pair found in the “Great Death Pit,” in the royal city of Ur, modern-day Iraq. ANIMAL GAME BOARD of twelve engraved shell plaques of lapis lazuli, limestone and shell. FOOTED BOWLS for eating and drinking, Hissar, Iran, circa 4500 - 4000 B.C. QUEEN PUABI GOLD HAIR COMB with seven finials in the shape of eight-petal blossoms, 2450 B.C. LUNATE EARRINGS of hammered gold, worn by Queen Puabi, 2450 B.C. BEADS of largely agate, gold and single carnelian bead, found in the “Warrior’s Grave,” Akkadian period, circa 2250 B.C.

      Through some twelve hundred objects—more than half of which have never before been on display—this suite of three spacious, well-lit galleries chronicles no less than the emergence of human civilization across millennia, from the earliest villages and towns to increasingly complex urban settlements that paved the way for the modern metropolis. “These galleries tell you a story about how ancient peoples changed their way of life to stay in the same place all year round,” says museum director Julian Siggers. “This led to the formation of the world’s first cities, in ancient Mesopotamia. Urbanization dramatically speeds up innovation and introduced many of the issues—good and bad—that are still with us today. So this story really resonates with all of us because it is our story.”

The artifacts come from more than two dozen excavations by Penn archaeologists in the so-called Fertile Crescent (mostly in modern-day Iraq and Iran) that revolutionized our understanding of the ancient world. Perhaps the most dramatic discoveries sprang from the joint Penn/British Museum excavations of the Royal Tombs at Ur led by Sir Leonard Woolley in the 1920s and 1930s. These include the famous Ram in the Thicket statuette of gold, silver and lapis; a silver boat-shaped lyre decorated with a stag; and the centerpiece of the museum’s Middle East collection, Queen Puabi’s headdress and jewels.

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH SUNDAY MAGAZINE, September 28, 1930, newspaper article about Royal Tombs of Ur discoveries: “What Science Has Discovered About the Personal Adornment of Chaldean Ladies.” 

      In January 1928 Woolley sent a breathless telegram (in Latin, for secrecy) to Philadelphia. Translated, it reads: “I found the intact tomb, stone built and vaulted over with bricks of Queen Shubad [Puabi] adorned with a dress in which gems, flowers, crowns and animal figures are woven. Tomb magnificent with jewels and golden cups.” This royal burial chamber, dated to around 2450 B.C., contained not just the body of the bejeweled queen, which was laid out on a wooden bier, but also those of her attendants—six men and sixty-eight women who, as reward for their service, were bludgeoned to death and buried with their queen, along with a trove of royal artifacts, all remarkably well preserved.

Queen Puabi’s headdress is truly spectacular to behold. It includes more than twelve meters of gold ribbon, which was wound around her voluminous hair (think Princess Leia in Star Wars). Above this she wore three wreaths composed of strands of carnelian and lapis beads and festooned with gold leaves. Each leaf is a single piece of gold hammered into shape and folded at one end into two loops that attach the leaf to the strands and the strands to one another. The most ornate wreath features two- and three-pointed willow leaves tipped with carnelian beads, and flowers with petals of lapis and shell. A frontlet joins three strands of lapis and carnelian with twenty gold rings. Atop it all, a large gold comb erupts into an array of star-shaped flowers. A pair of boat-shaped gold earrings completes the ensemble.

According to Jane Hickman, a specialist in ancient jewelry and editor of the museum’s Expedition magazine, Queen Puabi had on more than twelve pounds of ornamentation when she was discovered. “The hair comb itself weighs a pound!” Hickman and her colleague, collection keeper Katy Blanchard, note that all of the materials used in the headdress had to be imported from neighboring regions—the gold from present-day Afghanistan or Syria, the lapis from Badakhshan in Afghanistan, the carnelian from the Indus Valley—indicating the enormous wealth of the queen, as well as the far-flung trade networks that had already developed at this early stage of civilization.

QUEEN PUABI REGALIA of headdress, beaded cape and jewelry of gold, lapis lazuli and carnelian, discovered on the queen’s body in her tomb at the Royal Cemetery of Ur, circa 2450 B.C. Puabi was wearing about five pounds of jewelry, mostly gold, on her head and about seven and a half pounds of jewelry, mostly semiprecious stone beads, on her body. Photograph by Bruce White.

      A modern proverb admonishes us that “you can’t take it with you,” but the ancients seem to have had other ideas. Although much is unknown about Sumerian burial rites and beliefs, the fact that people of importance were buried with their treasures, and warriors with their weapons, suggests a belief that these objects would be of further use to their owners. Blanchard notes that Queen Puabi’s diadem is “more correctly a series of necklaces.” One possible explanation is that these earthly treasures were intended to serve as currency in the afterworld. “Maybe in every level of the underworld she’s handing over a necklace to make it through to the next place,” says Blanchard. “So she took it with her as payment. These are questions we still have.”

Indeed, nearly a century after they were unearthed, these treasures still have many secrets to divulge, and research on the collection is ongoing. Interactive kiosks in the galleries utilize digital technology to allow visitors to take a deeper dive into some of these topics of interest, including what the motifs on ornaments and vessels tell us about the flora, fauna and agricultural practices of the region, many of which continue in various forms today.

Later excavations at sites such as Rayy, near present-day Tehran, yielded artifacts from the Islamic period, which fill much of the third gallery. These include many rare manuscripts such as an illustrated copy of the Khamsa of the twelfth-century Persian poet Nizami and an illuminated Qur’an, as well as everyday objects such as cooking vessels and textiles from the Ottoman period.

The legacy of Near Eastern archaeology cannot be separated from the area’s more recent history and the often troubled relationships between its modern-day inhabitants and the West. “We can’t open galleries from this region of the world without noting that the deep material, human and cultural heritage of the region is also under attack,” says Siggers. With this in mind, the Penn Museum has launched a Global Guides initiative with funding from the Barra Foundation. Through this program, the first of its kind in the nation, the museum has hired as tour guides immigrants from Iraq and Syria. These men and women will, according to associate curator Stephen Tinney, “pair the history of ancient Mesopotamia and surroundings with stories drawn from their own unique experiences growing up in the Middle East,” giving visitors a broader perspective on the region’s long history of continuity and conflict.

Fostering such connections between ancient and modern experience was a stated goal of the Penn Museum’s transformation of its Middle East collections, the first in an ambitious series of planned renovations to the institution’s signature galleries. Indeed, one emerges from these galleries with the sense that our histories—and therefore our destinies—are much more intertwined than we are often led to believe, and that the key to our shared humanity lies in our creativity and the innovative solutions each culture arrives at in addressing the common problems we face.

The Penn Museum is located on the campus of the University of Pennsylvania, 3260 South Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104. Visit their website at www.penn.museum.

 

WILLOW WREATH of gold, lapis, carnelian, and shell.

 
 

      Get Inspired!

 
 

David-Updike-Contributor.jpg

David Updike is an editor at the Philadelphia Museum of Art, where his current projects include exhibition catalogs on Marcel Duchamp and the Art to Wear movement. His profile of designer Wendy Stevens appeared in Ornament, Vol. 40, No. 2. For this issue, he ventured across the Schuylkill River to another Philadelphia cultural treasure, the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, to tour its newly renovated Middle East Galleries. His visit left him with a renewed respect for the common, ancient roots of human civilization, and a little bit in awe of Chaldean superstar, Queen Puabi.

Easy Closeup Photography Volume 40.4

CAMERA SETUP FOR TABLETOP PHOTOGRAPHY, with a Canon 7D, 100mm macro lens; a Canon Speedlite 580EX and opaque plastic diffuser mounted on the external flash of the camera, which is attached to a Leica tablepod and ballhead. Visible as a knurled silver knob, this device permits the camera to be adjusted to almost any angle. Alongside is a set of Kenko extension tubes, of 10, 12 and 36mm, which give increasing magnifications. The extension tube is mounted between the camera body and the lens. Being light and compact, this type of setup is easy to carry and use when out of the photo studio. Another use of such lighting equipment is shown on the top right image, last page of this article.  Photographs by Robert K. Liu/Ornament.  WARRING STATES COMPOSITE BEAD shot with 100mm macro and lit by 580EX external flash, 2.9 centimeters diameter.

CAMERA SETUP FOR TABLETOP PHOTOGRAPHY, with a Canon 7D, 100mm macro lens; a Canon Speedlite 580EX and opaque plastic diffuser mounted on the external flash of the camera, which is attached to a Leica tablepod and ballhead. Visible as a knurled silver knob, this device permits the camera to be adjusted to almost any angle. Alongside is a set of Kenko extension tubes, of 10, 12 and 36mm, which give increasing magnifications. The extension tube is mounted between the camera body and the lens. Being light and compact, this type of setup is easy to carry and use when out of the photo studio. Another use of such lighting equipment is shown on the top right image, last page of this article. Photographs by Robert K. Liu/Ornament. WARRING STATES COMPOSITE BEAD shot with 100mm macro and lit by 580EX external flash, 2.9 centimeters diameter.

If you can’t see it, you can’t study it—anyone who is a serious researcher of jewelry needs to be able to look closely at the piece being studied. Ideally, a binocular microscope of 20 to 40x magnification would suffice for examining most jewelry, although such scopes usually do not come equipped with an adaptor to take photos of what is being seen in the scope, and not all researchers have access to binocular scopes. Besides ancient jewelry, I have a deep interest in ethnographic jewelry, especially those made of metal. Detailed and closeup photographs of such jewelry are rarely seen, but these types of images can tell much about techniques and skills of the makers. Good macro photographs can substitute for stereo microscopes, but closeup images sometimes require additional magnification. Here I describe a relatively easy way of making such closeups, with two different ways of providing that all crucial lighting.

 

EXTREME CLOSEUP OF WARRING STATES COMPOSITE BEAD, of low-fired glaze over faience core of plant ashes. The image spans a width of 1.6 centimeters of the 2.9 centimeter diameter bead. This bead is virtually the same as an approximately fifth century B.C. specimen analyzed by Wood et al. (1999). Their bead had the same makeup and colors, which are common to many composite beads. While it is not clear how the low-fired glazes are applied, one can see from this closeup that some are precisely brushed on (?), others appear to be dabbed on in layers, eventually resulting in stratified or mounded/rounded eyes or rosettes, probably due to the high surface tension of the glazes or the glazes incompletely melting (Wood 2001). Shot with 100mm macro, 36mm extension lens, ISO 100 and studio strobe.

 

      I needed to take closeup photographs for recent articles on ancient glass Nubian face beads (Ornament, Vol. 40, No. 2, 2017) and on Tuareg/Mauritanian jewelry (Ornament, Vol. 40, No. 3, 2018), so I have gone back to using the very simple setup of a macro lens, and extension tubes, lit either by an external flash or with studio strobes. Camera is handheld or on a tripod. Either of these modes of lighting work because the speed of a camera flash or a studio strobe is so short that it can more or less eliminate camera shake.

PHOTO SETUP AT BOSTON MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS FOR SHOOTING NUBIAN GLASS FACE BEADS, with Canon 7D, 100mm macro and 12mm Kenko extension ring. Camera is coupled with cable to Canon Speedlite 580EX, with plastic diffuser, that is mounted on a Leica ballhead and table tripod. Camera was handheld, with the tripod mounted light source aimed at glass face beads on white background paper (Liu et al. 2017).

      The first situation, in a museum, required a portable setup that needed little time for setup, as well as limited space. The camera was handheld, which demands steadiness and a lot of concentration, as the slightest movement at high magnification will alter the framing of the photograph and possibly the sharpness. The images for the North and West African jewelry were shot in the Ornament studio on a sweeptable, with the camera on a sturdy tripod. This helped in making images that were more precisely framed, but it is perfectly feasible to handhold cameras when using strobes and it is my usual mode.

When we took closeup images of ancient Nubian face beads excavated over one hundred years ago, we determined that a halo of whitish glass that surrounded all the face canes was actually badly crazed glass, indicating severe incompatibility with the mosaic glass canes (Liu et al., 2017). With my continuing interest in faience, composite and glass beads of the Warring States Period, I decided to revisit some such beads in our study collection, applying closeup photography to them, with two modes of lighting.

WARRING STATES COMPOSITE BEAD shot with 100mm macro and lit by 580EX external flash, 2.9 centimeters diameter. SAME BEAD BUT WITH 20MM EXTENSION TUBE showing increased magnification of the center portion of bead in left-hand image. Four glaze colors are visible, a red brown and a yellow, colored by iron oxides; a blue, colored by copper-barium tetra-silicate or Chinese Blue; and an opaque white. Because the glazes, especially on the stratified eyes may not have melted completely, there is not extensive running or slumping of these structures (Wood 2001).

SAME WARRING STATES COMPOSITE BEAD shot with same camera setup but lit by studio strobe in overhead softbox and under sweeptable. Note difference in color; that lighting by external flash produces colder colors on the bead. FRAMING not exactly duplicated as above but both types of lighting suffice. Unlike glass Warring States beads, this type of composite bead does not require the use of premade elements. More precise Photoshopping would probably better align colors of both images but using these relatively simple setups yield useful imagery to enable close study of such beads.

      One of the continuing puzzling aspects was how intricate, polychrome designs were made on the composite beads that were often contemporaneous to Warring States glass beads. With a faience or clay core, which were atypical in not using quartz, such beads had built-up or high-relief stratified eyes, apparently achieved by layering low-fired glazes, possibly like overglaze firing with ceramics. Firing glazes over a porous faience core may differ from firing other ceramics or silicates and is unique to the Chinese (Wood 2001). However, no one has really determined if the layered designs were fired at the same time, or if there were multiple firings, but most likely the latter was not practiced. That being said, Yang et al. (2013) believed application of glazes and structures like horned eyes was a stepwise procedure, may have involved pre-made components and molds. I believe only horned glass eyebeads required pre-made components. The closeup images reveal no seepage of the glaze colors or layers into each other, although it is not known if a layer of glaze is allowed to dry before another is applied. According to Wood et al. (1999), the glazes of their composite bead were colored by lead, barium and hematite or iron, with the blue glaze related to Han Blue.

CAMERA SETUP ON TILTALL TRIPOD, showing distance from Mauritanian or Tuareg amulet propped upright on sweeptable. Studio strobes provided the lighting. A bellows or a holding device that enabled precise forward/backward movement would have made framing easier.

      Besides studying the composition of ancient beads, closeup photography can be easily applied to many other materials and objects. Tuareg smiths, as well as those from Mauritania, do extremely fine chasing/engraving, with a minimum of crude tools and equipment, often made by the jewelers themselves, while having no access to magnifying aids like Optivisors. According to Cheminée (2014: 75), jewelers from other African countries bring their pieces to be engraved by Tuareg smiths, since they are so good at this technique. Desiring to look closely at their work and skills compelled me to take closeup photos for this article. When I observe their jewelry, I usually cannot see with my eye what the closeup images reveal; only with Optivisors can I begin to see details of the engraving. One wonders how these remarkable metalsmiths can accomplish all this with only their eyes, simple tools and ambient light, often in poorly lit rooms.

 
 

BEAUTIFUL MAURITANIAN OR TUAREG AMULET, of silver, copper with steel back; it has cutouts that once held red and most likely green-colored material, now too faded to determine their original color. The silver balls are decorative, as the stepped front is held onto the steel back by bezels, not rivets. Note the fine engraving. The pendant/amulet is 5.7 centimeters wide, not including the hanger. CLOSEUP MAURITANIAN/TUAREG PENDANT, showing the very precise engraving, done before the silver balls were attached. Note the jeweler’s strokes, as well as slight errors in certain areas of the pendant. In the right margin, in a width of 1.8 millimeters, the jeweler has engraved seven lines. The uppermost silver ball is 0.6 cm in diameter.

ELEGANT BUT WORN TUAREG GERBA-SHAPED TCHEROT AMULET, of white metal and brass sweated onto steel and cold-joined by bezels. The back has no decorations. This shape is a stylized goatskin, used to carry water. The amulet is 6.5 centimeters tall and subtly domed. ARROW-SHAPED ENGRAVED PANEL, only 1.7 centimeters wide. It is difficult to comprehend how much engraved detail the Tuareg smith can put into a panel with his graver. In a 1.6 millimeters space, there are six engraved lines; in 2.8 millimeters, there are ten engraved lines. This closeup shows virtually every stroke of the engraving tool and how much engraving goes into each decorative panel on these amulets.

TUAREG NECKLACES COLLECTED by A.J. Arkell in the 1930s from Tuareg refugees living around El Fasher, Darfur Province, Sudan, shot with macro lens/external flash. The inner necklace uses silver Agadez crosses, an Idar-Oberstein agate talhakimt, Czech molded-glass pendants that have been chipped or ground to simulate shape of the diamond-shaped Tuareg silver pendants. This modification again shows how the Tuareg adapt foreign ornaments to their style. The outer necklace uses a characteristic Tuareg diamond-shaped pendant, silver bamboo-shaped beads and silver cornerless cube beads. Image originally published in black/white from film in Sara Wither’s article on the Arkell Collection (1998: 78). Courtesy of The Pitt Rivers Museum, University of Oxford.

      In the past, when film was used, I employed more elaborate equipment and lighting had to be much more carefully controlled, as film images cannot be manipulated as much or as easily as digital images post exposure. The film photograph of the Tuareg necklaces shot twenty years ago did not have sufficient depth-of-field to show the entire necklaces sharply. Closeup photography, its lighting, exposure for film and digital cameras and equipment were discussed in depth in my recent book, Photography of Personal Adornment (Liu 2014). I hope more jewelry and bead researchers will apply these relatively simple photographic techniques to extract more information from their study material.

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Cheminée, M. 2014. Legacy. Jewelry Techniques of West Africa. Brunswick, VT: Brynmorgen Press: 232 p.
Liu, R. K. 1977. “T’alhakimt (Talhatana), a Tuareg Ornament: Its Origins, Derivatives, Copies and Distribution.” The Bead Journal 3 (2): 18-22.
2014. Photography of Personal Adornment: Photographic Techniques for Jewelry/Artwear Craftspeople, Researchers, Scholars and Museum/Gallery Staff. San Marcos, CA: Ornament Inc.: 160 p.
2018. “Tuareg Amulets and Crosses: Saharan and Sahelian Innovation and Aesthetics.” Ornament 40 (3): 58-63.
—, Sage and T. Holland. 2017. “Ancient Nubian Face Beads: The Problem With Suppositions.” Ornament 40 (2): 34-39.
Withers, S. 1998. “The Arkell Collection.” Ornament 21 (3): 78-79.
Wood, N. 2001. The influence of glass technology on Chinese ceramics. In: A. and B. Haughton (eds), The International Ceramics Fair and Seminar June 11. London, International Ceramics Fair: 36-40. 
—, I.C. Freestone and C.P. Stapleton. 1999. Early polychrome glazes on a Chinese ceramic bead of the Warring States period: 1-15. In: International Symposium on Ancient Ceramics: Scientific and Technological Insights (ISAC 1999): J. Guo (ed). Shanghai: International Symposium on Ancient Ceramics: 594 p. (In Chinese with English abstract.)
Yang, Y. et al. 2013. Nondestructive Analysis of Dragonfly Eye Beads from the Warring States Period, Excavated from a Chu Tomb at the Shenmingpu Site, Henan Province, China. Microscopy and Microanalysis 19 (2): 1-9.

 

      Get Inspired!

 
 

RKL_Contributor.jpg

Robert K. Liu is Coeditor of Ornament, for many years its in-house photographer, as well as a jeweler using alternative materials like heatbent bamboo and polyester. His recent book, The Photography of Personal Adornment, covers forty-plus years of shooting jewelry, clothing and events related to wearable art, both in and out of the Ornament studio. Chinese faience, composites and glass, both ancient and ethnographic, are among his primary research interests. A frequent lecturer, some of his topics include precolumbian jewelry, prehistoric Southwest jewelry, ancient Egyptian jewelry, and the worldwide trade in beads. In this issue, Liu discusses how to take closeup photographs of jewelry and beads for study or research, as well as beginning an occasional series on beads of historic and/or technical significance.

Idar-Oberstein Volume 40.3

GEBRÜDER WILD COMPANY BEAD SAMPLE CARD, showing a wide range of Idar-Oberstein agate ornaments, including some rarely seen in the African trade. The top row displays talhakimt, turmrings and simulations of feline claws.

Idar-Oberstein-Title.jpg

Beads from Idar-Oberstein are easy to spot. Whether they are part of a Mauritanian headdress, prayer beads from Mecca or a strand from a West African market, they have a standard set of characteristics—striped dark brown, black or orange stones, cut in a variety of distinct shapes and made with great skill and precision.

      A German town of about thirty thousand people, Idar-Oberstein has been known throughout history as a place of stones, with local deposits of mostly low grade agate, jasper and other semiprecious stones. When it comes to bead history specifically, the town is almost synonymous with a wide array of agate beads that were traded to African and Arab countries. Though these stones were probably used since Roman times, the first documented proof of stonecutting in Idar-Oberstein dates from the fifteenth century. This was not a source of much income though. Due to economic hardship in the 1800s, growing numbers of Germans from this region settled in Brazil searching for opportunities. In 1827, a group of stonecutters from Idar who had settled in Brazil found local Brazilian agate deposits. The first shipment of rough stones arrived in Idar-Oberstein in 1834 and led to the very successful production and trade of Idar-Oberstein agates. 

STONECUTTER AT WORK. Stonecutting was hard work, abetted by having to lie down and push against the grindstone. Young workers risked a deformed chest. In general, the lifespan of the workers was short. Photograph from early 1900s. ROUGH BRAZILIAN AGATE STONE BOULDERS brought into Idar-Oberstein, from early 1900s. Photographs courtesy of Floor Kaspers.

 
 

      The rough stones from Brazil were auctioned in Idar-Oberstein. They were sorted, weighed and small pieces were cut off to show the natural color and banding. At first, a lot of the stones were cut and set in gold jewelry; later on, they were mostly made into loose agate objects, like beads and pendants for a foreign market. The agate from Brazil proved tough competition for the Indian agate. As a result, the agate trade from India slowed down and production and wealth in Idar-Oberstein grew quickly.

NEWER PRODUCTION TALHAKIMTS, TALHATANAS AND TURMRINGS, IMPEXCO COMPANY. Germans call these turmrings, although English terminology distinguishes them as three types. The rounded “soft” edges indicate tumble polishing and therefore are newer pendants, dating from the 1960s.

      Trade companies were set up in the mid-1800s to serve the market for stone beads. An example is Gebrüder Wild, a company established in 1858—the firm was known around the world for their production of African jewelry. Harald Wild, from the company, in describing the process says, “The traders brought all the craftsmen together. Before the arrival of Brazilian agate, there really was not much of a professional industry. The traders managed to get the cutters, drillers, polishers, and the women stringing the beads working together. Companies like Gebrüder Wild would give orders to the different craftsmen to produce certain goods, which would then be exported in bulk.”

The traders brought examples of designs in agate to Cairo, even though it was not real carnelian; but the color was good, and so it was held in high regard (Spittler, 2002). In the second half of the twentieth century, the trade was more and more done by the Africans themselves.

BEAD SAMPLE CARD FROM THE GEBRÜDER WILD COMPANY, of hand-polished talhakimt, with sharp edges, thus pre-1960s. The blue agate examples have not been seen in the African trade.

Many of the bead merchants traded in a great variety of items, and they cooperated with other European beadmaking places. For example, they would let the people in Gablonz (Bohemia, now the Czech Republic) make glass copies of the agate beads. These copies were sent to Idar-Oberstein and traded together with the agate beads. Examples are the talhakimt pendants. Their design was patented by German cutters, and then the makers in Gablonz were given permission to make the same designs in glass. Since the 1980s, the demand for stone beads in Africa has declined.

The coloring is what really set the beads apart from those coming from India. The rough material, agate, is a striped or banded version of chalcedony. In nature, different metals produce different colors, and the resulting agates are called sardonyx, chrysoprase, carnelian, or onyx, depending on their color. 

Artificial coloring techniques were already used in antiquity, but the Germans managed to perfect it. Brown was made by soaking the stone in a sugar solution and then heating it, turning the sugar into a dark brown caramel with white stripes. Black “onyx” was made by putting the stone in sulfuric acid and sugar and then heating it (Francis, 1994). The sugar would get carbonized. Each color had its own recipe. As Si Frazier referenced in Beads (1999): “It was found that certain types of Brazilian agate were eminently suited for staining. The agate could be turned red, white, blue, green, black, or yellow using inorganic chemicals, colors which would not fade in the harsh sunlight of Africa or the Middle East. The recipes were regarded as highly important trade secrets.”

The people from Idar-Oberstein refer to the coloring techniques as brennen (heating or burning), färben (coloring or dyeing) and beitzen (often translated as staining, but a different, more permanent, technique). Different processes produce different colors. Most of these techniques were developed in Idar-Oberstein between 1813 and 1879 (Trebbin, 1985).

The stones would be cut into smaller pieces, and these pieces were pre-cut into the basic shapes. For this first step, it was easier and cheaper to use a hammer and chisel to shape the stone, because grinding is more time-consuming. For big beads and other products, the stone was shaped directly on the wheel. Smaller pieces, like cabochons, would be stuck onto a wooden handle so they could be ground against the wheel. 

Idar-Oberstein cutters used large stone wheels that could be up to two meters wide and weigh up to three hundred kilos. Generally, two people would work on a wheel powered by a water mill. Some of the wheels had grooves to make specific shapes like round, oval and bicone roughs. Stonecutting was not an easy or a healthy profession. The cutters would lie on a wooden bench, pushing the stone against the wheel (Frazier, 1999). 

The final step on the wheels was the polishing which was done on beechwood cylinders, with earth as the abrasive agent. From the 1960s onwards, most of the polishing, especially on beads with simple shapes, was by tumbling. Instead of individually polishing the stone they were tumbled together, which is a much more efficient but a less precise process. It is also a way to distinguish the older beads from the newer ones. The beads with sharp edges are most likely made before 1960.

 
 

Left to right: BARREL OF ROUGH UNTREATED AGATE at the Impexco Company in Idar-Oberstein. HEATING A POTFUL OF AGATE BEAD ROUGHS on the stove, part of small scale treatment of agate to arrive at the orange/carnelian color, at the Impexco Company. UNTREATED AGATE with pieces core-drilled for bead blanks. Note the gray color versus that of the treated bead blanks in right-hand photograph. HALF-FINISHED BEAD BLANKS from Idar-Oberstein, ready to be drilled, cut or polished, already treated to reveal the intricate banding patterns. Courtesy of Floor Kaspers Collection.

 
 

BULK STRAND OF AGATE TALHAKIMT PENDANTS, as well as other stone and glass beads from the African trade, from a West-African vendor at a recent African Art Village Show, Tucson, Arizona. These talhakimt appear to be pre-1960s, as indicated by the series of small cuts or nicks along their edges.

      The trade and production of agate beads in Idar-Oberstein took off once the companies discovered a Brazilian agate source. The skill of the craftsmen, the quality of the stone, the use of international trade routes, and adapting to the world market was how Idar-Oberstein became a very successful beadmaking town.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Much help in the research of stone beadmaking in Idar-Oberstein has come from Harald and Julia Wild, Wolfgang Weinz and Wolfgang Kley. Support has come from the Bead Society of Los Angeles.


REFERENCES
Dalarozière, Marie-Françoise. 1994 Perles d’Afrique. Édisud, Aix-en-Provence, France.
Dubin, Lois Sherr. 1987 The history of beads, from 30,000 BC to the present. Harry N. Abrams Inc, New York, USA.
Francis, Peter Jr. 1994 Beads of the world, a collector’s guide with price reference. Schiffer Publishing, Atglen, USA.
     —2001 The stone bead industry of southern India. Beads, Volume 12-13.
Frazier, Si. 1999 A history of gem beadmaking in Idar-Oberstein. Beads, Volume 10-11.
Kaspers, Floor. 2016 Beads from Germany, Idar-Oberstein, Lauscha, Neugablonz. Marblings Publishing, Netherlands.
Liu, Robert K. 1982 Amira Francoise: Living with beads in the Sudan. Ornament 5 (4): 24-27. 
     — 1987 Imitators and Competitors, India, Idar-Oberstein and Czechoslovakia. Ornament 10 (4): 56-61.
     —1995 Collectible beads, A Universal Aesthetic. Ornament, Vista, USA.
Spittler, Gerd. 1999 Der Weg des Achats zu den Tuareg-eine Reise um die halbe Welt. Geographische Rundschau, Jahrgang 54, Heft 10.
Trebbin, C. 1985 Achate, geschliffen in Idar-Oberstein – Amulette, Schmuck und Zahlungsmittel in Afrika. Die Heimatfreunde Oberstein e.V., Idar-Oberstein.
Wild, Julia. 2016 Afrikanisches Geld aus Idar-Oberstein. Simurg, Kulturzeitschrift, Heft 6.

 

BEAD SAMPLES FROM THE GEBRÜDER WILD COMPANY traded to Mecca at the turn of twentieth century. Many were used in the Sudan, some repaired with silver caps when the ends broke (Liu 1982).

 
 

    Get Inspired!

 
 

Floor-Kaspers_Contributor.jpg

Floor Kaspers is an independent bead researcher and artist from the Netherlands. She has been exploring European bead history through her travels. By going to factories, old dump sites, shops and museums, she collects not just beads, but the stories connected to beads. After learning more about bead history, she also started making her own beadwork and glass art as a new way to explore the medium of beads and glass. Kaspers has written several books, including Beads from Germany which describes the development and production of beads in three German bead towns: Lauscha, Idar-Oberstein and Neugablonz. In the article on stone beads from Idar-Oberstein she explains the origin of the stones, the designs and the techniques of these typical agate trade beads.

Ancient Nubian Face Beads Volume 40.2

40_2_Nubian-Face-Beads-Title.jpg

ENLARGED VIEWS OF FOUR INTACT NUBIAN FACE BEADS: These very clear images show good representations of Medusa, two as a Gorgon and two as a woman. But in this case, the women are formed from Gorgon face canes, evident from the striations of their hair; numbering 8 - 9. The rectangular striations represent the writhing snakes of Gorgon. The clarity of their outlines and their precise shapes suggest that these are geometric rods that were bundled onto or overlaid the face cane and not hot-layered. These four beads present two treatments of the basic face cane, all with a black outline around the lower face, with an additional red lower surround for the Gorgons, as well as a yellow bust. The red arc represents the blood from her severed head. Gorgon canes used on spherical face beads very rarely show this feature; out of over 220 scanned images, there were only two with a blood arc.

The close conformation of the Gorgon faces suggests they are from the same cane. Gorgon as a woman has flesh-colored glass formed into a neck and shoulders, with a black line or rod for a necklace, but they differ somewhat, possibly altered when marvered or encased onto or into the matrix to form a cane, although both have 9 hair striations. All of the glass of the face, neck and bust have some degree of uneven pink, although some are more faded.

The use of flesh-colored glass for mosaic face beads is unique, since all other extant beads have the skin portrayed in white/whitish or slightly ruddy glass. Could the skin tone of all other beads have de-vitrified to white from flesh-colored? Probably not. The whitish glass around each face cane is the same and has deteriorated more than the other colors of glass. When illuminated at the right angle, these white, mottled areas are actually cracked or crazed glass.

These similarities strongly point to products of the same glass workshop, most likely Roman Egypt, possibly Nubian. The transparent green matrix around the face canes of these Nubian face beads makes this color the most common for tabular face beads, totaling 44 of 62 tabular beads examined, or seventy-one percent. Photograph courtesy of and © the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, previously published in Liu (2014: 42).

Figural mosaic images on beads are among the most rare of ancient glass. Early Roman Egyptian face beads of approximately 100 B.C-A.D. 100 represent the most numerous of such ornaments, perhaps existing in the low thousands and were widely distributed through Europe and the Middle East, and are usually regarded as luxury goods. Recent finds place them in the Crimea, Yemen, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Nubia, and Croatia (Sidebotham et al., 2015), as well as Hungary (Liu, pers. comm.). Their most common imagery displays full-frontal faces of Medusa as a Gorgon with stylized snakes as hair, or less often of Medusa as a beautiful woman with luxurious long hair, a necklace and a bust. Late Roman face beads, of the fourth/fifth centuries B.C., number less than thirty, occur primarily in northern Europe and Russia, but have entirely different imagery, most likely emperors. The only other cultures that also produced figural mosaics are the Javanese (Jatim beads of fifth/sixth century A.D., Lankton and Bernbaum 2007), Thai at Klong Thom (tabular face beads that may not be mosaics, possibly first to seventh century A.D.), at Bara in Pakistan and potentially somewhere in Afghanistan, based upon two nearly identical beads with complex griffin and duck mosaics.

      For those who study such mosaic face beads and glass with similar canes, there are major, problematic suppositions, since no workshops with such figural canes have ever been found, nor any face canes used for beads. Some Egyptian glass workshop sites did contain mosaic glass/canes (Stern and Schlick-Nolte 1994: 27). However, two larger cane slices depicting the most frequently used Gorgon and Medusa as a woman are in the collection of the Freer Gallery of Art (Liu 2008b: 62, 1.6 cm high and 2.2 cm diameter) and may be very rare examples of face canes before they were pulled or reduced to the diminutive sizes suitable for marvering onto or encasing in a face bead (page 38). Composite mosaic bars with half-face images for theater masks have been found, but these larger, more complex canes were never used for beads (Liu 2008b). 

ROUND TABULAR EARLY ROMAN MOSAIC FACE BEADS from the Crimea, all with a Gorgon face cane, 1.4 cm high, 0.4 - 0.6 cm thick; (Liu 2008b, 2014). Burial conditions there tend to weaken the glass, so one of these broke, revealing that the transverse, non-tapering perforation resulted from hot-piercing and not from being formed on a mandrel. With our observation of similar hot- or rod-piercing in Nubian tabular face beads, this probably means that all or most tabular face beads are composed of one face cane encased in a glass matrix, with the perforation pierced. They all follow the convention of having the eyebrows, eyes and nose made in one rectangular block, with the mouth a separate element. The forehead and lower part of the face are also separate; this has also been observed by Alekseeva (1971). Note that the right-hand bead is very similar in color to Nubian tabular face beads, and the lighter glass of the eye/nose/eyebrow block is clearly evident. Courtesy of Teresa and Paul Harbaugh. Photographs by Robert K. Liu/Ornament unless noted. BROKEN HOT-PIERCED LOZENGE-SHAPED NUBIAN TABULAR FACE BEAD AND FRONTAL VIEW OF BROKEN NUBIAN TABULAR BEAD OF GORGON showing distortion of cane and red arc indicating blood of Gorgon’s severed head, 1.1 cm diameter/23.830c. Note crazed, cracked or crackled glass around face cane. BROKEN TABULAR GORGON FACE BEAD VS CLASSIC ROUND TABULAR GORGON FACE BEAD FROM NUBIA; the latter is deteriorated, but the stylized rod striations are faintly visible, 1.1 cm diameter/23.788. INTACT TABULAR NUBIAN FACE BEAD OF GORGON AS A WOMAN, placed on top of flashlight in attempt to show cracks/23.830c. Note cracks, grooves on surface, as well as large amount of surface pits. All photographs of Nubian glass beads are courtesy of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, taken by Robert K. Liu/Ornament.

      Because the Gorgon/Medusa canes are placed into so many different shapes of beads (spherical, tabular, barrel, and bulla-shaped), numbering between one for tabular, two to eight face canes per spherical bead and varying in how they are placed on the bead, with a great variety of surrounds and colors, in addition to other mosaic imagery, researchers have postulated that Medusa, Gorgon and other canes employed on face beads were most likely produced as a basic cane by skilled glassworkers in Ptolemaic-Roman Egypt, such as in Alexandria, Egypt, the Levant or elsewhere in the Middle East (Henderson 2013, Lankton et al., 2016). These face/Medusa/Gorgon canes, whether in large diameter form or reduced by pulling while hot into smaller sizes suitable for face beads, were then distributed to disparate end users, usually glass beadmakers. Thus the great individual variation found on early Roman face beads. But there has also never been confirmation that face canes were an item of trade, although glass tesserae for mosaics or beads have been found in such contexts (Andersen and Sode 2010, Henderson 2013, Neri et al., 2016).

LOZENGE-SHAPED, ROUND AND SQUARE TABULAR ROMAN MOSAIC FACE BEADS, from respectively Nubia, unknown location and the Crimea. The rhomboid cane of Gorgon as a woman lacks any overlaid hair, and has a simple black bar as a necklace, like the face cane from the Crimea. The surrounding glass is badly cracked and appears whitish; it is approximately 1.2 x 1.5 cm. THE ROUND BEAD OF MEDUSA as a woman has overlaid black hair, necklace of a mosaic bar, quite similar to the spherical face bead found in Nubia on bottom of page and is 1.5 cm in diameter. THE SQUARE BEAD OF MEDUSA as a woman has a necklace and a crisp bundled-rod surround of chequer pattern; this style is one of two well known for square face beads (Liu 1976; 2008b). Square face beads are rarer then round ones but lozenge-shaped tabular beads have only been found in the one Nubian cache. In all three beads, the face cane extends through the depth of the bead. Mosaic face cane slices were probably clipped or nipped off the composite bar, and have conchoidal fractures on both obverse and reverse, before grinding/polishing, as seen in specimens on page 38. Square bead courtesy of Teresa and Paul Harbaugh. Photograph of round tabular bead courtesy of Jamey D. Allen and former Lois S. Dubin Collection.

      While we do not know the size of ancient face canes, Brian Kerkvliet (Liu 1989), the first American to make mosaic face canes, used the layering or the hot-strip method for his murrine canes. In one continuous work session of about two hours, he ended with a piece of glass cane approximately three inches in diameter by four inches long (approximately 7.5 x 10.0 cm), before pulling the rod while hot to a size small enough for application to face beads, at approximately 0.35 cm diameter.

The iconography of the three Gorgon sisters, including Medusa, the only one who was mortal, is schematic but not overly rigid when portrayed in glass mosaics: Gorgons have variable number of hair striations or stylized snakes, seen as square/rectangular rods (Liu 2014). Most, but not all Gorgons on tabular beads, also have a red line on the lower portion of the face cane, indicating the blood from her severed head, sometimes misinterpreted as a beard. Very rarely do Gorgon face canes on spherical beads display this red arc of blood. 

Medusa, shown with long black hair, a neck with necklace and bust, also shows considerable variation; she is known for her charms and beautiful hair, but in a number of her face canes, the overlying black hair barely covers the stylized snake hair, which protrude from the forehead as knobs, as seen below. Where Medusa is shown with long hair, achieved by hot layering black glass (actually purple), it varies considerably, as do the mosaic bars used to denote her necklace. The application of Gorgon and Medusa as a woman has never been seen on the same face bead, except on one extremely rare glass spindle whorl held by the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Liu 1976). All these images have apotropaic value, most likely adding to their value as luxury beads. Presumably, people contemporary with these face beads would have been able to decipher the meaning of all their features, but not modern viewers, who lack knowledge about their mythology and their iconography.

SPHERICAL EARLY ROMAN MOSAIC FACE BEADS from Nubia and two beads from the marketplace, with no attribution. All are Medusa with long black hair, a mosaic bar necklace, neck and bust, all in white glass for the skin (although the flesh of the Nubian bead has an ivory cast); middle bead is 1.3 cm diameter and has been highly reground. THE GREEN BEAD FROM NUBIA has two face canes and no other applied features; it is highly unusual in that the matrix of the face cane almost matches the body of the bead; usually, the cane color contrasts with the rest of the bead, as seen in the other two examples. Note the close resemblance of the mosaic bar used to denote a necklace in the round yellow tabular bead and the green spherical face bead from Nubia. THE BLUE BEAD IS A GOOD EXAMPLE of the overlaid hair not completely hiding the original rod striations on the Gorgon face cane, as noted by the partial rods or knobs on her forehead. At least 6-7 such beads have been seen. Notice the considerable variation of the nose, eyes, eyebrow, mouth, and necklaces of these six beads, as well as the hair, and that only the Nubian tabular cane has flesh-color. Photograph of the green spherical bead 24.764 courtesy of Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Photograph of middle bead from Liu (1995). Photograph of blue bead courtesy of Walker Qin, collection of the Beijing Bead Museum/Library.

      In 2014, I was able to view high resolution color photographs of the tabular mosaic face beads excavated in the 1920s by Reisner in Nubia from the Merotic culture. These early Roman face beads, besides being the largest cache from a known context, were unique for their lozenge shape, versus round or square for all extant tabular face beads. Like other early Roman mosaic face beads, those from Nubia probably date from about 100 B.C.-A.D. 100, although those from Meroë are more tightly dated to 40 B.C.-A.D. 114. In addition, Gorgon canes were used to represent both Gorgon and Medusa, without overlaid black hair for Medusa, but she had a neck, necklace and bust, and many faces and bodies of both types were in flesh-toned glass, also never before seen in extant face beads (Liu 2014). Gorgon used as a woman, i.e. Medusa, is a rare mosaic image; out of a database of about 220 face beads that I have scanned, only 38 present Medusa as a woman, usually seen as plaques on spherical face beads, even rarer on tabular face beads. Of these 38, only 7 appear to be made from Gorgon canes; none of these modified Gorgon faces had ever been applied to tabular beads. Since Nubians were adept with faience working, glazed stones, glassworking in the form of unique stratified eyebeads with gold bands, as well as enameling (Markowitz and Doxey 2014a), I thought at that time that these Nubian face beads could be an excellent example of local glassworkers modifying imported face canes. But without compositional studies on the glass of face canes and their surrounds, there is no way to prove this supposition. In recent email discussions with James Lankton, he might test some of these Nubian face fragments if granted permission.

Our study of these Nubian face beads presented a compelling case for the supposition that all forms of facial images for early face beads were all derived from a Gorgon cane, adapted by beadmakers into Medusa and numerous other variations.

      With the advent of portable XRF spectrometers and their ability to undertake accurate, non-destructive compositional analyses (Lankton et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2012), museum curators and collectors should be much less loath to have their specimens tested. The Nubian face beads, while weathered to some extent, have mainly non-devitrified surfaces, so they should not skew results of XRF testing. If glass samples of the eyes/nose block, matrix of the face, their hair striations, hot-layered hair and surrounds were tested, as well as the matrices surrounding the cane slices, there should be enough information to compare with the compositional glass databases now being gathered (Henderson 2013; Lankton and Dussubieux 2006). If face beads from other known sites were also tested, the results would offer more for comparison. Large and varying differences in glass of the face canes versus their surrounds could suggest local production of the beads, with the mosaic canes as an import. 

GREEN BARREL BEAD WITH TWO FACES, found in Nubia; faces appear to be a version of Gorgon, but not seen before. Brown glass may denote hair. The face cane shown is battered and of very white glass. This bead (21.12473.4) was found with the eyebeads with gold foil or bands on the last page. Courtesy of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

      The face beads excavated by Reisner could have been imported by the Nubians from Roman Egypt, since there was extensive trade, including luxury items like glass, between gold and agricultural product rich Nubia and Egypt (Markowitz and Doxey 2014b; O’Connor 1993: 89). Our study of these Nubian face beads presented a compelling case for the supposition that all forms of facial images for early face beads were all derived from a Gorgon cane, adapted by beadmakers into Medusa and numerous other variations.

This past October, both Tom Holland and I were going to be in Boston, so I requested permission from Denise Doxey (one of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Egyptian Curators) if we could study the Nubian glass finds, which included those seen previously as photographs and a few others mentioned in excavation reports. Sage and Tom Holland are among the few American glass artists who have replicated ancient glass beads (2003), so I was grateful to have his experienced eye in directly examining these face beads. Since we were not at the museum long, further shortened by an emergency evacuation, I sent a set of my photographs to Sage and Tom so they could analyze them further. Tom’s first observation was that all the Nubian tabular face beads were slices from a whole cane and not face canes marvered onto a bead. Like most tabular face beads, these were therefore not made on a mandrel but were a nipped slice of a cane, reheated for working into a more uniform shape, then hot-pierced, often called rod-pierced. Hot-piercing with an iron rod distorts the cane, as seen in the photographs shown of both broken Nubian and non-Nubian tabular face beads. Interestingly, while the interior glass is distorted, the surface face cane images themselves do not show this effect. In this type of piercing procedure, the glass is hot, while the iron rod is cold. In contemporary glassworking, a red-hot tungsten rod is used to pierce cold glass, the complete opposite of the ancient process.

When we examined the tabular Nubian face beads, both intact and fragmentary, on the surface of almost all Nubian-found tabular face beads, while very well preserved, there was deteriorated white, mottled glass surrounding the face canes, also noted by Reisner in his field sketches. Using macro photography and flash at the right angle, it become apparent that this is merely extensive cracking, crazing or crackling of the glass surrounding the face cane, indicating great incompatibility with the opaque murrine face cane glass. On some, there were also fractures (very apparent with transillumination), both in the glass and on the surface, as well as many pits on the glass surface. Not all tabular Nubian face beads displayed these additional features, nor did other non-Nubian tabular face beads with similar transparent green glass surrounds. The crazed glass appears to be a translucent brown glass, seen in a few examples that had not crazed too badly (page 39). The cracked glass framed the face cane to provide support for the facial components, to prevent surface tension from distorting these features when the mosaic cane was being hotworked. This type of incompatibility was never seen on any other extant tabular early Roman face beads. 

UNUSUALLY LARGE PLAQUES OR FACE CANES OF GORGON AND MEDUSA, respectively F1909.491, 2.2 cm diameter and F1909.511, 1.6 cm high, neither perforated but ground flat on both sides. Too big for face beads, these are probably extremely rare slices of canes before they were heated and pulled or reduced in diameter to sizes suitable for use in face beads. These are the only such face canes I have seen since I began to research mosaic face canes in 1974. The Medusa slice is notable for the very luxuriant hair and having what appears to be two necklaces, one a mosaic bar. Slices of face canes were struck, clipped, snapped or chipped from a composite mosaic bar (Stern and Schlick-Nolte 1994: 62).
THREE FULL-FACE MOSAIC SLICES REPRESENTING COURTESANS, 2.2 cm high, show the same cane, but flipped; two are ground flat, one shows the conchoidal fractures as a consequence of being broken from a composite bar. Interestingly, these faces are not white, but almost flesh-colored. Both the Freer Gallery and the Metropolitan Museum of Art own identical slices, which are somewhat too small and simple for theater masks, but too large for face beads. In addition, such imagery of courtesans was never used for any face beads. Photographs were previously published in Liu (2008b), courtesy of the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. Gift of Charles Lang Freer; and Liu (2008a), shows additional tabular face beads and mosaic face inlay, courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

      Three other face beads from Nubia represented a round green classic Gorgon tabular bead, much degenerated so it was not possible to determine the original color of the face cane; a spherical bead with two faces of Medusa, with cane slices almost matching the green glass of the bead matrix. Rarely are face canes just marvered onto a matrix without different squares of color filling the intervening spaces, or of the face cane not being of a contrasting color to the matrix of the bead. The last was a green barrel bead with two somewhat battered and atypical faces of Gorgon (page 37); this face and that of Medusa were white, unlike the other flesh-toned Nubian tabular beads, and lack cracking/crazing of their glass, although they do show damage from burial. Thus, we strongly believe these three face beads were imports.

While Nubians certainly had skills working silicates such as faience and enameling, there is no evidence of glassworking (Markowitz and Doxey 2014b), although Lacovara (1998) comments on the importance of the Merotic glass industry. The approximately 35 intact, broken and fragmentary tabular face beads excavated from Meroë (W308 number 27, accession numbers 23.830a, b and c, Dunham 1963) show unique features: rhomboid or lozenge shape, versus round or square for all other extant tabular face beads; both Gorgon and Medusa images derived from Gorgon canes, without addition of overlaid hair on Medusa; flesh-colored face and body, versus white for other extant tabular beads; extreme incompatibility between the glass of the face canes and overlaid or surrounding glass, manifested in cracking, crazing and crackling of the glass surface. Despite all these dramatic differences, we cannot conclude whether these Merotic finds are locally altered or are imports. Whether locally adapted or imported from Roman Egypt, all the tabular Nubian beads are the product of the same workshop or beadmaker, and are unique in the totality of early Roman face beads. The other three face beads that were not found in W308 are most likely imports. Perhaps careful compositional testing will provide an answer to the origin and makers of this tantalizing group of Nubian tabular face beads.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Robert K. Liu thanks Denise M. Doxey, Yvonne J. Markowitz, Amelia Kantrovitz, and Carolyn Cruthirds of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, for providing both the photographs of the Nubian glass beads, for answering my numerous questions on their attribution, as well as permission to study, photograph and publish the Nubian material. He also thanks Jamey D. Allen for the yellow face bead image of Medusa and prior discussions on Roman mosaic face beads. 

 

NUBIAN TABULAR FACE BEADS where glass around face cane has not entirely crazed, showing its original translucent brown glass color; one can clearly see that it is not meant to be hair, but merely frames the face cane. When making a cane, the background glass of any subject is a necessary support that prevents distortion from surface tension when the mosaic cane is being hotworked.
GLASS EYE BEADS WITH STRATIFIED EYES AND APPLIED GOLD BANDS, recovered from a royal burial in the Northern Cemetery at Meroë, 1.8 cm diameter (Dunham 1957). Dating from the early second century A.D., these eye beads are the only ones known in the ancient world to have applied gold bands on their surface (pers. comm. 10/31/2014 D. Doxey), although other composite and glass beads also had gold applied (Liu 2014: 41). Note the two parallel grooves on the left-hand bead, due to gold foil or sheet having fallen off. Due to the higher melting temperature of gold than glass, it will sink into the glass, causing such grooves that have been misinterpreted as ground into the glass to accommodate the gold bands. Harvard University—Boston Museum of Fine Arts Expedition. Photograph courtesy of and © Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, previously published in Liu 2014: 41.
PHOTOGRAPHIC SETUP FOR NUBIAN GLASS BEADS of hand-held Canon 6D, 100mm macro lens, coupled to Canon 580EX flash with plastic diffuser, on Leitz tablepod/ballhead, as primary camera. 100mm lens was coupled to Kenko 12mm extension tube to further increase magnification. Liu also used hand-held Canon 7D, 60mm macro lens with high ISO and no flash.

 

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alekseeva, E. M.
1971 Miniature mosaic in glass ornaments, first century B.C. second century A.D. [in Russian]. Sovetskaia Arkheologiia 4: 178-185.
1978 Ancient Beads of the Northern Black Sea Littoral 2 [in Russian]. Sovetskaia Arkheologiia G1-12: 104 p., plates 20-34.
1982 Ancient Beads of the Northern Black Sea Littoral 3 [in Russian]. Sovetskaia Arkheologiia G1-12: 85 p., plates 35-54.
Andersen, J. H. and T. Sode. 2010 The Glass Bead Material. In: Ribe Excavations 1970-76, Vol.6, edited by M. Bencard and H. Brinch Madsen. Jutland Archaeological Society, Hojbjerg, Denmark: 17-59. 
Auth, S. H.
1999 Mosaic glass mask plaques and the ancient theater. Journal of Glass Studies 41: 51-72.
Bruhn. K.-S. 1995 Designs in miniature: The story of mosaic glass. Corning, The Corning Museum of Glass: 48 p.
Dunham, D. 1957 The Royal Cemeteries of Kush. Vol. IV. The Royal Tombs at Meroë and Barkal. Excavated by the late George A. Reisner, edited and compiled by Dows Dunham. Boston, The Museum of Fine Arts: 218 p.
1963 The Royal Cemeteries of Kush: Vol. V. The West and South Cemeteries at Meroë. Excavated by the late George A. Reisner, edited and compiled by Dows Dunham. Boston, The Museum of Fine Arts: 466 p.
Engle, A. 1976 Readings in glass history 6-7. Jerusalem, Phoenix Publications: 142 p.
Erdrich, M. and H.-U. Voss. 1997 Die Perlen der Germanen des 1.-5. Jahrhunderts in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Schleswig-Holstein und Niedersachsen: 77-93. In: U. von Freeden and A. Wieczorek (eds) Perlen. Archäologie, Techniken, Analysen. Bonn, Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH: 386 p., 26 pls.
Ettinghausen, R. 1962 Ancient glass in the Freer Gallery of Art. Smithsonian Publication 4509: 44 p.
Friedman, F. D. (ed) 1998 Gifts of the Nile. Ancient Egyptian Faience. Thames and Hudson and Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design: 288 p.
Fukai, S. 1983 Persian glass beads. Kyoto, Tankosha: 238 p.
Goldstein, S. M. 1979. Pre-Roman and Early Roman Glass in The Corning Museum of Glass. Corning, The Corning Museum of Glass: 312 p.
2001 Ancient glass. In: Ancient Glass, Miho Museum: 178-183. Shiga Prefecture, Miho Museum: 217 p.
Gore, R. 1984 The Dead Do Tell Tales at Vesuvius. National Geographic 165 (5): 557-613.
Harden, D.B. 1967. Some aspects of Pre-Roman mosaic glass. Annales du 4e Congres de l’Association Internationale pour l’Histoire du Verre. Liege: AIHV: 29-38.
Henderson, J. 2013 Ancient Glass. An Interdisciplinary Exploration. Cambridge University Press: 433 p. 
Holland, S. and T. Holland. 2003 Master Class: Warring States Beads. Ornament 27(1): 46-51.
Karlin, E. Z. 2007 The historic use of the medusa image in jewelry and the decorative arts. Presented at the Second Annual Fall Jewelry Conference at FIT: A place in time: Jewelry within the context of the decorative arts. October 6, 2007, New York City.
Lankton, J.W. and M. Bernbaum. 2007 An Archaeological Approach to Understanding the Meaning of Beads Using the Example of Korean National Treasure 634, a Bead from a 5th/6th Century Royal Sila Tomb. Beads 19: 32-41.
—and L. Dussubieux. 2006 Early glass in Asian maritime trade: A review and an interpretation of compositional analyses. Journal of Glass Studies 48: 121-144.
—Diamanti, J. and J. M. Kenoyer. 2003 A bead timeline. Volume I: Prehistory to 1200 CE. Washington, D.C., The Bead Museum: 95 p.
—B. Gratuze, K. Tantrakan, Q.H. Li, and S. Liu. 2016 Scientific Analysis of Ancient Glass: Answering Questions and Questioning the Answers. In: F. Gan, L. Qinghui and J. Henderson (eds). Recent Advances in the Scientific Research on Ancient Glass and Glaze. Vol. 2, Ch. 14: 267-301. Hackensack, World Century Publishing Corp. and Singapore, World Scientific Publishing Co., Pte, Ltd: 572 p.
Lierke, R. 1992 Early history of lampwork—Some facts, findings and theories. Part 2. Fire or flame? Lampworking techniques in antiquity. Glastechnische Berichte 65 (12): 341-348.
Liu, R. K. 1974 Glass mosaic or millefiore beads. The Bead Journal 1 (1): 22-26.
1976 Ancient glass ornaments with human facial images. The Bead Journal 2 (3): 27-32.
1989 Collectibles: Mosaic Face Beads. Ornament 12 (3): 22-23.
1995 Collectible Beads. A Universal Aesthetic. Vista, Ornament, Inc.: 256 p.
2008a Jewelry of the Classical World. The Met’s New Greek & Roman Galleries. Ornament 31 (3): 36-39.
2008b Roman Mosaic Face Plaques and Beads. Ornament 31 (5): 60-65.
2012 Islamic Glass Beads. The Well-Traveled Ornament. Ornament 36 (1): 58-63, 70.
2014 Nubian Mosaic Face Beads. The Enigma of Variations. Ornament 37 (5): 40-45.
Liu, S., Q.H. Li, F. Gan, P. Zhang, J.W. Lankton. 2012 Silk Road glass in Xinjiang, China: chemical compositional analysis and interpretation using a high-resolution portable XRF spectrometer. Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (7): 2128-2142.
Markowitz, Y.J. and D.M. Doxey. 2014a Gold and the Gods. Jewels of Ancient Nubia. Ornament 37 (4): 32-37.
2014b Jewels of Ancient Nubia. MFA PUBLICATIONS, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston: 184 p.
Neri, E. et al., 2016 Late Roman and Byzantine mosaic opaque “glass-ceramics” tesserae (5th-9th century), Ceramics International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2016.09.033i.
O’Connor, D. 1993 Ancient Nubia. Egypt’s Rival in Africa. The University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania: 178 p. 
Rütti, B. 1991 Die römischen Glãser aus Augst und Kaieraugust. Forschungen in Augst 13/1: 370 p., tables.
Sarpellon, G. 1990 miniature di vetro. murrine 1838 1924. Venezia, arsenale editrice: 194 p.
Sidebotham, S.E., I. Zych, J. K. Radkowska and M. Woxniak. 2015 Egypt. The Harbor Temenos in the Southwestern Bay. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean. XXIV/1: 306-319.
Selling, D. 1942 Mosaikpärlor med ansiksmasker. Fornvännen: 23-48.
Sode, T. 2004 The Glass Bead Material. In: Ribe Excavations 1970-76, Vol.5, edited by M. Bencard and H. Brinch Madsen. Jutland Archaeological Society, Hojbjerg, Denmark: 83-102. 
Spaer, M. 2001 Ancient glass in the Israel Museum. Beads and other small objects. Jerusalem, Israel Museum: 384 p., 2 maps.
Stern, E. M. 2001 Roman, Byzantine, and Early Medieval Glass. 10 BCE-700 CE. Ernesto Wolf Collection. Ostfildern-Ruit, Verlag Gerd Hatje: 427 p.
—and B. Schlick-Nolte. 1994 Early glass of the ancient world. 1600 B.C.-A.D. 50. Ernesto Wolf Collection. Ostfildern, Verlag Gerd Hatje: 450 p. 
Stout, A. M. 1985 Mosaic glass face beads: Their significance in northern Europe during the Later Roman Empire. Vols. I, II. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota: 359 p.
1986 The archaeological context of Late Roman Period mosaic glass face beads. Ornament 9 (4): 58-61, 76-77.
Tempelmann-Maczynska, M. 1985 Die Perlen der römischen Kaiserzeit und der frühen Phase der Völkerwanderungszeit im mittereuropäischen Barbicum. Romisch-Germanische Forschungen 43: 339 p., 80 Tafe

 

      Get Inspired!

 
 

RKL_Contributor.jpg

Robert K. Liu is Coeditor of Ornament and for many years its in-house photographer. His recent book, The Photography of Personal Adornment, covers forty-plus years of shooting jewelry, clothing and events related to wearable art, both in and out of the Ornament studio. A frequent lecturer, some of his topics include precolumbian jewelry, prehistoric Southwest jewelry and ancient Egyptian jewelry. In this issue Liu revisits the unique early Roman mosaic face beads found in Nubia, and enlists the help of glass bead experts and replicators of ancient glass, Sage and Tom Holland.

Glass Ornaments at the Israel Museum Volume 40.1

CORE-FORMED PHOENICIAN HEAD PENDANTS, representative samples of these early glass ornaments, from about the second to sixth century B.C. 
GLASS WORKSHOP PRODUCTS of blown vessels and rare windowpane glass, Beth Shean, A.D. sixth-seventh century. Courtesy of the Israel Museum. Photographs by Jocelyne Okrent and Eliana and Daniel Mitropoulos.
CHUNKS OF GLASS COLORED BY COBALT OR COPPER OXIDES most likely recovered from the sea, as seen by the barnacle shells. Blue glass was both highly desired and widely used; glass beadmakers utilized pieces of such glass to make their products, but did not make their own melts.

The vast complex of the Israel Museum, based in Jerusalem, is its largest cultural institution and houses the Archaeology Wing, recently visited and extensively photographed by Jocelyne Okrent and her children, Eliana and Daniel Mitropoulos. This enabled us to write a brief review of their extensive glass ornament and small object collections of the ancient Middle East. Here we show glass beads and other items of personal adornment from Mycenaean Greece to the Islamic Period, when their glass products were widely distributed in antiquity. Given the importance of glass and other silicate beads and ornaments in deciphering dating, trade, technology, and cultural traits of ancient peoples, this exhibit covers most of the important glass ornaments from the ancient Middle East.

      Like neighboring Egypt, Israel is also rich in archaeological glass. The glass ornaments of the Archaeology Wing, both from within the country and the surrounding Middle East, have been documented by Maud Spaer’s catalog (2001). Much of their holdings in glass come from the 1970s donation of the Eliahu Dobkin Collection, which was assembled in Jerusalem. Additional important contributions came from the Stern Collection, acquired in Egypt, and the Rabenou Collection, gathered in Iran.

The 1970s were the beginning of intense activity in the bead community and I began acquiring the Ornament bead study collection then (Liu 1995), often from sources in the forementioned countries, as these were the main suppliers of the marketplace. It is likely that Lebanon, Syria and Turkey also contributed glass ornaments. Jocelyne’s late mother, Rita, of the Rita Okrent Collection, was a major dealer of beads and other jewelry at that time.

Because a large part of the museum’s glass beads, pendants, earrings, and bracelets came from private collections, not only does it match that of many other bead collectors, but also tends to be more broadly representative than many museums without access to such types of collections. Thus their displays and accompanying captions are heuristic for museum visitors who want to expand their knowledge of ancient glass ornaments and small objects of glass like spindle whorls, as well as glassworking in general.

Few museums are able to exhibit glass workshops and their products, such as the one from Beth Shean. A glass furnace was also found, as well as ashes and olive pits for annealing the glass, to prevent cracking from heat stresses. At a mid-first century B.C. Jerusalem glass workshop, there was evidence of glassblowing, a late glass technique that is not germane to most ancient beads shown.

While some of the glass ornaments are segregated as to age or culture, others are shown in a mixed lot, which can be confusing to those who have less knowledge of dating or attribution of beads. But such assemblages are often the way beads are found or acquired from the marketplace. The obvious challenge is in their identification. Often, working with small batches of mixed beads provides good opportunities for learning. For example, in Figure 4, of gold glass beads, there are also three pyramidal glass spacers, two of blue glass, one with a gold-foil cover. Hotworked, then ground, these show how gold was used to enhance glass ornaments. This is a practice that dates from at least Mycenaean culture, when beads, like those shown on this page, were also gold-foiled. 

 

Left to right, top to bottom:
1. MYCENAEAN GLASS IVY LEAF SPACER BEADS, press-molded, fourteenth-thirteenth century B.C.
2. TRIANGULAR EYE BEADS, from Jerusalem and the Aegean(?), late ninth-seventh century B.C., with core-formed glass vessels, sixth-third century B.C.
3. MONOCHROME BEADS/SPACERS, TRAILED BEADS AND BIRD BEADS, Near East and Western Asia, fifteenth-thirteenth century B.C.
4. GOLD GLASS BEADS, BEADS SIMILAR TO THOSE FROM RHODES AND ROMAN PYRAMIDAL SPACERS, latter having one with gold-foil cover.
5. TABULAR EYEBEADS, THREE EARPLUGS/ORNAMENTS AND TWO BIRD BEADS, Western Asia, Egypt and probably Italy, eighth-seventh century B.C.
6. EYEBEADS, Mediterranean region, Persia and Egypt, sixth century B.C. - A.D. fourteenth century.
7. STRAND OF GLASS PENDANTS, varying dates, up to Byzantine Period.
8. ISLAMIC PERIOD BEADS AND PENDANTS, including those done with folded technique.
9. GLASS BRACELETS, unprovenanced, A.D. third-nineteenth century.
10. ROMAN/PTOLOMAIC, ISLAMIC AND BYZANTINE BEADS AND PENDANTS; note use of loops, and characteristic yellow/green date bead from Egypt.
11. SILVER HOARD FOUND IN TERRACOTTA JAR, mostly of silver jewelry, rolled/folded silver melts, carnelian and other hardstone beads, as well as faience beads. Most likely this was a jeweler’s hoard. Possibly the silver was rolled to save space in the jar.

 

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY
Lankton, J. W. et. al.
2003. A Bead Timeline. Volume I: Prehistory to 1200 CE. Washington, D.C.: The Bead Museum/Bead Society of Greater Washington: 96 p.
Liu, R. K. 1995. Collectible Beads. San Marcos: Ornament, Inc: 256 p. 
Spaer, M. 2001. Ancient Glass in the Israel Museum. Beads and Other Small Objects. Jerusalem: The Israel Museum: 384 p., 1 map.

 

      Get Inspired!

 
 

Jocelyene-Okrent-Contributor.jpg

Jocelyne Okrent is the owner of the Rita Okrent Collection, which she has managed since early 2008. Her mother, Rita Okrent, was a pioneer bead dealer and ethnic jewelry designer, active from the 1970s/1990s in necklace design with ethnic beads. Although Jocelyne’s professional expertise was as a product manager in technology, and not in her mother’s bead collection, she has become knowledgeable regarding her mother’s remaining inventory. In her spare time, Okrent manages her twin thirteen year olds, two cats and a dog, and does some local Southern California Bead Society Bazaars.

RKL_Contributor.jpg

Robert K. Liu is Coeditor of Ornament and for many years its in-house photographer. His recent book, The Photography of Personal Adornment, covers forty-plus years of shooting jewelry, clothing and events related to wearable art, both in and out of the Ornament studio. A frequent lecturer, some of his topics include precolumbian jewelry, prehistoric Southwest jewelry and ancient Egyptian jewelry. In this issue Liu writes about glass ornaments at The Israel Museum with Jocelyne Okrent, and documents five jewelers who attended the International Folk Art Market in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Kristina Logan Volume 39.3

TURQUOISE FLORAL PENDANT/BROOCH of flameworked glass and fabricated sterling silver, 7 centimeters diameter, 2016.  Photograph by Dean Powell. 

TURQUOISE FLORAL PENDANT/BROOCH of flameworked glass and fabricated sterling silver, 7 centimeters diameter, 2016. Photograph by Dean Powell. 

After extensive renovations, the Renwick Gallery of the Smithsonian American Art Museum reopened this past July with a stellar showcase of objects from its permanent collection. “Connections: Contemporary Craft at the Renwick Gallery,” which is ongoing, offers eighty-plus eclectic and engaging examples of craft art, from the Eames brothers’ plywood Leg Splint, 1942, to Judith Schaechter’s stained glass The Birth of Eve, 2013. Curated by Nora Atkinson, the Lloyd Herman Curator of Craft, the exhibition works by association rather than by chronology, seeking to emulate today’s hyperlinked world.

      Kristina Logan is represented by a brooch/pendant featuring a pattern of cobalt and silver accented with a ring of sterling dots. The lampworked soda-lime glass and sterling silver piece, made in 2001, is displayed alongside Alexander Calder’s undated hammered copper Necklace. In a video produced for the show, Logan speaks about Calder and their aesthetic ties. She loves how he used simple materials and created value “by infusing them with creative energy, ideas and careful mark-making.” Glass, like brass and copper, she notes, “has little intrinsic value, but it is the artist’s hand and spirit” that can give them worth.

Logan’s appearance in the Renwick show comes as no surprise: over the past twenty-five years, she has become one of the foremost glass bead artists in the world. Her work is in major collections, including the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, and she has earned special recognition in her field, including the title “Dot Queen”—for the marvelous array of dots that accent her beads.

Certain of Logan’s designs, such as the Constellation necklace and the Cactus bead, are icons of contemporary beadwork. Her brooches, pendants, rings, and necklaces mesmerize. Kaleidoscopic disks set in sterling silver dazzle the eye.

COLLECTION OF TOTEM BEADS of flameworked glass, largest bead 10 centimeters long, 2000-2003.  Photograph by Dean Powell.

COLLECTION OF TOTEM BEADS of flameworked glass, largest bead 10 centimeters long, 2000-2003. Photograph by Dean Powell.

     Having started out making single beads, today Logan is the creator of reliquaries, candlesticks, goblets, teapots, chalices, and other objects that incorporate her beadwork. She is increasingly interested in pushing the boundaries of scale while retaining her intricate details. She is currently finishing up several statuesque drinking vessels inspired by eighteenth-century Nuremberg goblets she discovered in the Corning Museum of Glass. While the profile of her lidded goblets are similar to those early ones, the flameworked, pâte de verre and bronze pieces are “incredibly different” on a tactile level. One of them was featured in the recent exhibition “Beginnings” at the Corning Museum of Glass.

When asked about the evolution of her designs, Logan admits to progressing in geological time—very slowly. If you were to look at her beads today alongside ones she made early on, you would be able, she avers, to see the lineage. She does make drawings—of the brooches and metalwork—but the bead designs arise from experimentation. Once in a while an idea will come to her when she is not looking for it, at three in the morning, but ninety-nine percent of the time it happens when she is in the studio. She believes the constant pattern of work brings ideas. “I believe in that preparation,” she has stated. The concentration that comes with deadlines helps spur the work forward.

GOBLET of glass, bronze, silver, steel, lost wax cast and flameworked glass, cast bronze, 11.43 x 11.43 x 33.02 centimeters, 2016. Photograph by Bill Truslow.

     Logan’s beads are marked by opaque and transparent layers—“That’s how I find color,” she says. Starting with a “Crayola box of all the colors,” she uses layering to play subtle variations on the palette, thereby altering the design from piece to piece. She relishes this exploration of tint and shade and hue. Early on Logan was not always comfortable with color, and has noted, she “may have been afraid of it.” It was not the color in flameworking that interested her so much as the fluidity and movement of melting glass.

Logan likes working in series, “beading an idea to death,” she says with a smile, until she gets it right. She loves the refining process, a “precision” that comes “from hours and hours of going back over the same concept again and again,” deepening the vocabulary along the way. While she admires artists who can jump ideas, it is not in her DNA to work that way.

Architectural detail has been an important inspiration, be it East Indian doorways, Moroccan tiles, or mosaics from the pre-Renaissance and Renaissance. European reliquaries from 1300-1500, the bronze armatures found in Louis Comfort Tiffany’s work—these also inspire, as do patterns in nature. One collection of brooches got its start after Logan came across a book on ancient shields of Africa, South East Asia and Oceania from the Barbier-Mueller Museum collection in Geneva, Switzerland.

Logan has made it her mission to challenge the stereotype of bead jewelry, namely, beads strung together or with knots between them, like a string of pearls or a rosary. She is committed to connecting beads with metal in a way that is nontraditional, that “counteracts that idea of stringing.” To that end she cuts, drills and grinds her beads, in the process taking them to a new place in the realm of ornament. She is an innovator.

COLLECTION of large disk beads in flameworked glass, 5.08 centimeters diameter, 2016. Photograph by Kristina Logan.

     Kristina Logan was born in Worcester, Massachusetts, but spent much of her early life in New Hampshire’s White Mountains; she considers the Plymouth/Waterville Valley area her home. She boasts significant artistic genes, especially when it comes to working with her hands. Her mother, Reg Logan, née Surette, was a fashion illustrator at a time when newspaper and magazine advertisements were hand-drawn; today, she makes insect jewelry and ceramic objects. Logan’s grandmother, Reggie Surette, also worked in illustration, hand-drawing and -coloring for the Rust Craft Greeting Card Company, while her grandfather, Eliot Surette, did restoration in churches in the Boston area.

Growing up in this artistic milieu Logan recalls thinking that she, too, would draw for a living. In turn, she tells her own children, nine-year-old Valère and twelve-year-old Sophia, that she can tell that they already have the family hands. One of her necklace designs, a lively and playful collection of round beads, is named for her daughter.

Logan earned a BFA in sculpture at the University of New Hampshire in Durham in 1987. The all-star faculty included painter John Hatch (1919-1998), printmaker and draftsman Sigmund Abeles, and sculptor Michael McConnell (1948-2012). She appreciated the focus they placed on the foundations for making art—and their stories of life in New York City. She ended up embracing 3-D and carving in wood, sometimes with a chainsaw.

After moving to the coast of New Hampshire, Logan chanced into a job working for the renowned glass artist Dan Dailey in Kensington. “He needed people with good hands,” she recalls, and she fit the bill. In the four years in his studio, she received an education in glass. She did a lot of enameling on vases, as well as sandblasting, cold working, studio organizing “and making sure that pieces got to factories in West Virginia to be dipped in acid, and got back home again.”

One night while attending Pilchuk Glass School, Logan spied someone flameworking. She remembers thinking, “Oh, man, you mean I can do glass by myself? Without an enormous studio?” While she appreciates the sense of teamwork found among a group of glass blowers, she prefers working alone. As she noted in a 2009 interview, she likes the feeling of being self-reliant. 

Logan-LR-DSC_0957.jpg

     Logan was at Pilchuk to take a class in pâte de verre, which she describes as a kind of lost wax casting technique for glass. She was interested in trying to incorporate cast parts into the wood sculptures she was making at the time, but she found herself “seduced” by the flame and melting glass, by the intimacy and smaller scale of this work—“a torch and two hands.”

When she began to make beads, Logan was not all that serious. It was an amusement; “Oh, I’ll make some beads, it’ll be great, I’ll sell them for a dollar,” she recalls thinking. She had no idea that she would become fascinated by the rich cultural and anthropological history and reach of beadmaking. “All of a sudden,” she recounts, “I kind of plummeted into this world that I now exist in and adore.”

For a time Logan sold individual beads that other people would use to make jewelry. She attended bead shows, loading up her Volkswagen van and hitting the road. It afforded her a modest living and was “very empowering.” After a while, however, she wanted to make something out of the beads. She began collaborating with a jeweler friend who taught her how to solder. Soon she was making a few pieces of her own and loved it.

PREPARING the silver prior to soldering for Ivory and Red Constellation Necklace, 2015. Photograph by Kristina Logan.

     Logan never went to school for metalwork, but she knew enough to make the pieces she wanted to produce. If she wished to try something new, she would ask a friend—and sometimes her mother—how to do it. “I’ve always learned metalsmithing through osmosis,” she says. Formal training came from a few evening classes with the Australian silversmith Alan Place who worked for a time at Old Newbury Crafters in Amesbury, Massachusetts.

In her thirties Logan “induced” arthritis in the cartilage in her left thumb from nearly non-stop beadmaking. Taken aback by the idea that one could wear out a body part at that age, she wore a brace for a while, but continued to work as hard as ever. Eventually realizing that she could no longer be a “bead machine,” Logan began making larger objects and combining glass and metals. Returning to her sculptural roots, to what was important to her as an artist, she needed to invest more heart into her work in order “to feel better about myself and not have my hands wear out.”At the same time Logan began to see the potential of beads as sculptural forms. Individual beads could be resonant objects that people might carry around with them, like a Japanese netsuke or a marble—“a small piece that holds importance.” She came to believe that an object could be made so carefully that it could hold “spiritual content” without being attached to any specific religion.

Logan’s totem beads, inspired by ancient African granite beads, epitomize this belief. She started out making them as handles for objects, but never made the actual object for the handle. While she has made a few brooches out of them, she feels they connect to the hand more than anything.

Logan likes working in series, ‘beading an idea to death,’ she says with a smile, until she gets it right. She loves the refining process, a ‘precision’ that comes ‘from hours and hours of going back over the same concept again and again,’ deepening the vocabulary along the way. While she admires artists who can jump ideas, it is not in her DNA to work that way.

     The “Contemporary Glass Bead Exhibition” in Prescott, Arizona, in 1993 proved to be a turning point, both for Logan and the universe of bead artists. “You can kind of call that the beginning of the glass bead movement,” she says. About eighty people came together and realized, “Hey, we’re all making glass beads! We’re a society.” The Society of Glass Beadmakers, later changed to the International Society of Glass Beadmakers, was born. Logan would serve as its president in 1996-1998 and later, in 2005, win its Hall of Flame award. Its annual conference, called “The Gathering,” takes place in a different spot each year. While the ISGB has, says Logan, waxed and waned over the years, “we still get together.”

KRISTINA LOGAN’S STUDIO, designed and built by Michael Graf. Photograph by Kristen Fuller.

     Asked about how she balances teaching with her artmaking, Logan estimates that ninety percent of the time she is working alone in the studio—“just me making”—with the balance spent leading workshops. In addition to instructorships at Haystack, the Corning Museum, Penland, and other schools and private studios further afield, she has started offering bead workshops at her new studio in Portsmouth. Being around other artists and interacting with students charges her up.

In the workshop at Haystack, assisted by bead artist Priscilla Turner Spada from Newburyport, Massachusetts, Logan taught flamework technique—“all beads, all the time”—plus how to insert silver rivets in the bead holes. Seated before torches attached to three benches set along a wall of windows overlooking Jericho Bay, the students gamely wound the melting soda-lime glass canes around mandrels and listened as Logan shared the thought process that goes into creating her beads.

Logan has sought to impart her knowledge of her art to an ever broader audience. In 2009, the Corning Museum of Glass helped in that mission, producing “Beadmaking with Kristina Logan,” the seventh installment in its Master Class series. In the thirty-minute video Logan offers insight into her artistic principles. She notes, for example, that she has never turned away from making smaller beads because “it all serves the greater purpose, to have your hands ready to work with this molten material.” She also admits she is not a fast beadmaker. Indeed, she encourages her students to “seek ease and the fewest movements possible.” She likens it to her yoga practice “where your movement and your breath are very much connected to your mind at the same time.”

IVORY AND RED CONSTELLATION NECKLACE of flameworked glass and fabricated sterling silver, 4.45 x 1.27 x 66.04 centimeters, 2015. Photograph by Dean Powell.

      “Bead people are passionate about beads,” Logan says. They understand the primal connection people have to these pieces of glass and how they are worn on the body. They also appreciate, as she does, the long lineage of beadwork in the cultures of the world. These beautiful objects bring people together “on a heart level.” That is the level to which Logan aspires, in art and life.

SUGGESTED READING 
Benesh, Carolyn L. E. “Kristina Logan. A Luminous Aesthetic.” Ornament 21.4: 42-45, 1998.
DeDominicis, Jill. “Kristina Logan. Master Class in Glass Beadmaking.” Ornament 30.3: 64-67, 2007.
Dubin, Lois Sherr. The History of Beads: From 100,000 B.C. to the Present, revised and expanded edition. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2009.
Hemachandra, Ray, editor. The Penland Book of Glass: Master Classes in Flamework Techniques. Lark Crafts, 2011.
Jenkins, Cindy. Making Glass Beads (Beadwork Books). New York: Lark Books, 1997.
Logan, Kristina. “Creative Process and Inspiration.” Glass Bead Evolution. International Society of Glass Beadmakers, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014.
     Masters: Glass Beads: Major Works by Leading Artists. New York: Lark Books, 2008.
     1000 Glass Beads: Innovation & Imagination in Contemporary Glass Beadmaking. New York: Lark Books, 2004.

 

     Get Inspired!

 
 

Carl Little caught up with Kristina Logan in late August at the Haystack Mountain School of Crafts on Deer Isle where she was teaching a workshop on glass beadmaking. Based in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Logan is “the leading maker of glass beads working today,” according to David Whitehouse, executive director of the Corning Museum of Glass. Little is one of twenty poets featured in a series of videos produced during Maine poet laureate Wesley McNair’s tenure. They can be viewed on the University of Maine website. His most recent book is Wendy Turner—Island Light.

Egyptian Broadcollars Volume 39.3

VIRTUALLY INTACT FAIENCE BROADCOLLAR OF WAH, an estate manager, XIth Dynasty, circa 2020 B.C., 39.4 cm deep. X-ray in 1940 revealed this almost intact broadcollar within his mummy wrappings. It is the best preserved example of its type and is strung on linen threads without disk beads, with the typical fringe of drop pendants and semi-circular terminals. The first row has 83 cylindrical faience beads, the last 222 beads, increasing gradually in length from top to bottom, hinting at how many beads are required for this broadcollar. Ceramic artist Carol Strick has made a replica of this necklace.  Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art,  Rogers Fund/E. S. Harkness Gift, 1940, 40.3.2; gallery 105.  Photographed as displayed, with high ISO and manual mode on a Canon SLR.   Photographs by Robert K. Liu/ Ornament  unless noted.

VIRTUALLY INTACT FAIENCE BROADCOLLAR OF WAH, an estate manager, XIth Dynasty, circa 2020 B.C., 39.4 cm deep. X-ray in 1940 revealed this almost intact broadcollar within his mummy wrappings. It is the best preserved example of its type and is strung on linen threads without disk beads, with the typical fringe of drop pendants and semi-circular terminals. The first row has 83 cylindrical faience beads, the last 222 beads, increasing gradually in length from top to bottom, hinting at how many beads are required for this broadcollar. Ceramic artist Carol Strick has made a replica of this necklace. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund/E. S. Harkness Gift, 1940, 40.3.2; gallery 105. Photographed as displayed, with high ISO and manual mode on a Canon SLR. Photographs by Robert K. Liu/Ornament unless noted.

No other ancient culture has been as well-studied as that of Predynastic and Dynastic Egypt, especially the personal adornment of their upper class women and men. Well-developed technologies of working stone, metal, faience, glass, and fibers, all under the control of dynastic elites, contributed to a precision and uniformity of jewelry and dress. Living in a hot, dry climate, men wore linen kilts, women thin, tight sheath dresses of the same fiber, some pleated, and often with straps that covered the breasts. For health and comfort, both sexes usually shaved their heads, using wigs to prevent sunstroke (Watterson 1991). Depictions of ancient Egyptians on paintings, reliefs and statuary invariably showed them wearing broadcollars, almost an essential form of dress. The majority of broadcollars were made of cylindrical and/or disk beads of faience, a self-glazing, thixotropic ceramic that was both a luxury and a magical product for the elite (Friedman 1998).

 

To Read the Full Article

 
 

Robert K. Liu is Coeditor of Ornament and for many years its in-house photographer. His recent book, The Photography of Personal Adornment, covers forty plus years of shooting jewelry, clothing and events related to wearable art, both in and out of the Ornament studio. Recently he has been teaching one-on-one photography lessons at our office, as well as teaching workshops on bamboo jewelry. In this issue Liu writes about ancient Egyptian broadcollars, usually made of faience beads, how they were made and extant examples of this beautiful item of dress, including modern replicas by artist Carol Strick.

The Tucson Shows 2017 Volume 39.3

PETER VAN DE WIJNGAART, FLOOR KASPARS, ROBERT WILLIAMS, BERNIE LAWITZ, AND HIS DAUGHTER HANNAH LAWITZ at the Silk Road Gem & Jewelry Show off of Grant Road, in the former Grant Inn, now the Grand Luxe Hotel and Resort. Van de Wijngaart and Kaspars are Dutch bead lovers who visit Tucson every year. Lawitz is the former owner of recently closed Beads Galore.  Photographs by Robert K. Liu and Patrick R. Benesh-Liu.

PETER VAN DE WIJNGAART, FLOOR KASPARS, ROBERT WILLIAMS, BERNIE LAWITZ, AND HIS DAUGHTER HANNAH LAWITZ at the Silk Road Gem & Jewelry Show off of Grant Road, in the former Grant Inn, now the Grand Luxe Hotel and Resort. Van de Wijngaart and Kaspars are Dutch bead lovers who visit Tucson every year. Lawitz is the former owner of recently closed Beads Galore. Photographs by Robert K. Liu and Patrick R. Benesh-Liu.

There is a thrill to treasure-hunting that transcends the humdrum routine of everyday life. It is the feeling that comes from encountering the unknown, and even more alluringly, the ability to somehow take that home with you.

      There exists a place where that is possible. It is called the Tucson Gem & Mineral Show, which is somewhat of a misnomer in that instead of being one, singular show, it is more like if one occupied a small city with tents, pop-up tables, booths, and mini-vans. During the months of January and February, Tucson undergoes just such a transformation. Roughly fifty shows, fairs and festivals spring up around the city, some featuring just a dozen exhibitors, others hosting hundreds of vendors. It is not just gems and minerals that are for sale. Tribal and ethnographic art, ancient artifacts, crafting tools and supplies, hand-blown glass beads, jewelry, clothing, baskets, purses, backpacks, fossils, giant sculptures—it really is easier to list what you will not find at the Tucson Shows. Which is to say you can find almost everything there.

To Read the Full Article

 
 

Patrick R. Benesh-Liu is Associate Editor of Ornament and continues to find time to enjoy craft in between writing, travel and tech support. This January he and Robert travel to Tucson to visit the Gem & Mineral Show, where they will see old friends, make new ones, and cover all the wonders of that worldly bazaar. In this issue he describes one small corner of the vast market, and encourages readers to indulge in their inner explorer and visit the show themselves. As Ornament’s reporter, he also provides a zesty compilation of the latest news in craft, where you can find out what is happening with art to wear in the global neighborhood.

Sandy Swirnoff Volume 39.3

Sandy Swirnoff

Knotted Fiber Jewelry

FRIDA of nylon thread, Tibetan coral, glass seed beads, Indonesian silver beads, 2006. Collection of Grace Stewart. Photographs by Katie Gardner, courtesy of Mingei International Museum.

Sandy Swirnoff creates necklaces of intricately knotted nylon thread in colorful hues, embedding them with beads of all kinds, and sometimes with rescued shards of Art Nouveau glass. Thirty of these unique and wearable works of art are on view in Sandy Swirnoff—Knotted Fiber Jewelry, an exhibition presented by Mingei International Museum in San Diego, from January 14 to June 4, 2017. Swirnoff’s knotting process is a spontaneous style of macramé. According to the artist, “The best way to create free-form knotting is to watch carefully which direction the cords naturally want to go, to see if there is a pattern forming, a new shape wanting to appear, or some connection between areas that is graceful and has movement.”

 

To Read the Full Article

 
 

Christine Knoke Hietbrink is Director of Exhibitions and Chief Curator at Mingei International Museum in San Diego, California’s Balboa Park, which she joined in June 2010. Her most recent curatorial projects include “Sandy Swirnoff: Knotted Fiber Jewelry,” “American and European Folk Art from the Permanent Collection” and “Black Dolls from the Collection of Deborah Neff.” Knoke holds a BA in Art History from the University of California, Los Angeles, and an MA in Art History and Museum Studies from University of Southern California.

Kate Rothra Fleming Volume 38.5 Preview

Kate Rothra Fleming. 
Visions of the Natural World

 

THE BLUE DOVE NECKPIECE of torch-formed soda lime and dichroic glass, hand-fabricated, oxidized sterling silver chain; glass components sewn on with cable, 8 x 5 x 76 centimeters, 2015. Photograph by Robert Diamante.

Kate Rothra Fleming and her husband Frank Fleming first bonded over a Furmont reptile hook. She was surprised to see one in the back of his car, and he was astounded that this quiet, petite redhead knew what it was. She had recently quit her regular job to work full time as an artist, making glass jewelry, and Frank worked in the film industry, where one of his roles was to keep snakes off sets. They quickly recognized a shared passion for nature and natural history. Fleming’s mother, Elizabeth Ogren Rothra, a nature writer, was collaborating on the book On Preserving Tropical Florida (University of Miami Press, 1972) while her daughter, an only child, was young. “I spent my childhood traipsing around with mom and dad going into the remote parts of Florida interviewing the early Florida naturalists, the pioneer naturalists,” including Marjory Stoneman Douglass, a wetlands activist who wrote The Everglades: River of Grass in 1947. Fleming’s father, who taught home-bound children, helped her collect fish on the reef, including sargassum fish that she could feed in her hand by shaking tiny shrimp out of Sargasso weed. She also liked to catch snakes and recalls, “I was fascinated with the beauty of gradient colors and the smooth textures and patterns of the snakes and other reptiles that I would see. One time I found a green grass snake, just the most incredible shade of yellow green!,” adding, “I always let them go unharmed.”

 

 For The Full Article

 
 

Ashley Callahan is an independent scholar and curator in Athens, Georgia, with a specialty in modern and contemporary American decorative arts. The University of Georgia Press recently published her book Southern Tufts: The Regional Origins and National Craze for Chenille Fashion. She met with Kate Rothra Fleming at the Atlanta Contemporary Jewelry Show. While their conversation included many topics—especially nature and antiques—that were not directly about Fleming’s work, Callahan was impressed by how successfully she distills her interests in little drops of sparkly, shiny, frosty, and wearable glass.

Zhou Dynasty Glass Volume 38.4 Preview

Zhou Dynasty Glass and Silicate Jewelry

 

Since I began studying the faience, glass and other silicate ornaments of the Zhou Dynasty in 1975, this field has undergone a sharp dichotomy. While previously mostly foreign scientists or Chinese outside of China researched their chemical makeup, age and stylistics, in the past decades Chinese themselves have begun to intensively study their composition, through sophisticated non-destructive techniques like XRF and Raman spectroscopy, but with little attention to their typology, chronology or how they were made or used, despite the enormous increase in number of excavated sites bearing such beads (Gan 2009; Kwan 2001, 2013; Lankton and Dussubieux 2006, 2013; Li et al., 2015; Liu 1975, 1991, 2005, 2013; Yang et al., 2013; Zhu 2013). Now regarded as important cultural relics, beads of the Zhou/Han times were widely sold since at least the 1990s on the world antiquities markets, often sourced by looting, and which are still available (Murphy 1995; Liu 1996-1997).

      Faience, composite silicates and glass came late to China, lagging behind the Near East; faience about 1000 B.C. and composite silicates, frit and glass in the Spring and Autumn/Warring States (W.S.) periods of the Zhou dynasty. By then, bronze and stone industries were well established, with the former using sophisticated piece-mold and core-casting, while the latter employed similarly advanced lapidary technology. Even in the 1970s, I realized that these early Chinese glassworkers had adapted some of these same techniques for fabricating their glass ornaments, as seen in mold-cast, press-molded and lapidary-finished Zhou and Han glass artifacts. My own research on composite beads also implicates the role of early ceramics.

 

    Read the Full Article

 
 

Robert K. Liu is Coeditor of Ornament and for many years its in-house photographer. His new book, The Photography of Personal Adornment, covers forty plus years of shooting jewelry, clothing and events related to wearable art, both in and out of the Ornament studio. In this issue he writes about the extraordinary crafting of Zhou Dynasty/Warring States faience, glass and other silicate ornaments, as well as their complexity.

The String Theory Volume 38.2 Preview

The String Theory

CELTIC SQUARE KNOT, WOVEN PATTERN AND TREFOIL-DECORATED BEADS BY TOM HOLLAND, respectively 3.4, 2.9 and 3.4 centimeters high. The Celtic knot bead, also known as a Tibetan heart knot bead, took over an hour to make; the cross-hatching background contains eighty stringers of an inch and a half long, or ten feet of hair stringer total. Holland has made over sixty beads like this, with the same design on front and back, all of them exercises in muscle memory and heat control of the stringer. Photograph by Robert K. Liu/Ornament.

CELTIC SQUARE KNOT, WOVEN PATTERN AND TREFOIL-DECORATED BEADS BY TOM HOLLAND, respectively 3.4, 2.9 and 3.4 centimeters high. The Celtic knot bead, also known as a Tibetan heart knot bead, took over an hour to make; the cross-hatching background contains eighty stringers of an inch and a half long, or ten feet of hair stringer total. Holland has made over sixty beads like this, with the same design on front and back, all of them exercises in muscle memory and heat control of the stringer. Photograph by Robert K. Liu/Ornament.

Making glass beads has been my primary income for over two and a half decades. I employ many techniques, one of which is working with stringer, those fine strands of glass pulled from a small molten gather and applied in the flame of the torch to the surface of the bead. Eight years ago I started investigating cross hatching and its decorative potential. Some of the beads had a fabric look, so I tried to accentuate this effect. The idea of using glass stringer to mimic string sparked the idea of projecting knot patterns on the bead’s surface. While researching knot patterns and string history I came upon an article by Bednarik (2000), who pointed out the dependence of the bead on the string and knot in order to be an ornament. Without the string and knot, the bead is just an object with a hole in it. The purpose for any bead is to suspend it from someone or something. Here are a few things I have learned about the triad of the bead whose primary function is symbolic or spiritual, while the string and the knot’s primary function is utilitarian.

 

    Read The Full Article

 
 

Tom Holland, along with his wife Sage, has been contributing to the contemporary glass beadmaking movement through research of historical techniques and lectures. They have written articles for Ornament on Warring States and Islamic Period glass beads, taught internationally, as well as the United States and have been featured in many books and periodicals. Holland will be making a presentation on the string, knot and the bead at the 2015 Gathering in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The couple found each other through their love of beads and continue to create glass art in the solar home they built in the woods of the Arkansas Ozark Mountains.

Maryland to Murano Volume 38.1 Preview

Maryland to Murano. Neckpieces and Sculptures
by Joyce J. Scott

VIRGIN OF GUADALUPE AND CLOSEUP of woven glass beads, 35.6 x 22.9 centimeters, 2009. BREATHE of hand-blown Murano glass, beads, wire, thread, 52.1 x 49.5 x 5.1 centimeters, 2014. Photographs by Patrick R. Benesh-Liu. VESSEL of woven glass beads, mixed media, wire, 35.6 x 30.5 x 30.5 centimeters, 2006. Photograph by Carolyn L. E. Benesh.

The question of how stories come into being is not something we tend to consider; indeed, our predilection is for enjoying them, not questioning how they came about. But the DNA strands of the narrative wind themselves together from happenstance and memory, chance encounters and relationships between people, objects and ideas. If one were to see this ephemeral process translated into physical form, there is no need to look any further than the complicated web of connections created by master beadworker Joyce J. Scott.

 

Intact Ancient Precolumbian Jewelry Volume 38.1

Intact Ancient Jewelry. Precolumbian Ingenuity

INTACT PRECOLUMBIAN NORTH COAST PERUVIAN NECKLACE AND BRACELETS of mother-of-pearl (MOP) components, mostly likely strung on cotton cord; probably of middle horizon Wari influence, circa A.D. 700 - 1000. Intact bracelets are 1.7 centimeters wide, while the necklace, in four fragments, is 28.4 centimeters wide as laid out for photography. The MOP elements are probably from Pacific black-lipped oysters that occur off Ecuador and thus are an imported luxury material. Ex-Jean Lions collection, obtained before 1980; Robert Duff collection since 2007. Photographs by Robert K. Liu/Ornament.

Strung ancient jewelry is rarely found intact, unless climatic conditions or well-protected burials prevent the rotting of the organic fibers used in assembling the jewelry. Two geographic regions, parts of the Middle East, especially Egypt, and the arid north coast of Peru are known to yield finds of intact jewelry, as well as the prehistoric American Southwest and northern Mexico (Liu 2008). The most spectacular of such finds is the faience broadcollar of Wah (Liu 2005: 57) but much intact precolumbian jewelry, especially necklaces or their fragments (Gessler 1988; Liu 2008) come from the north coast of Peru. In this article, I show some amazing Wari jewelry, that may date to circa A.D. 700 - 1000, which is strung in ways not usually employed in assembling beads/components into necklaces and are among the most intact precolumbian jewelry I have seen. In fact, the ingenious ways employed by ancient Peruvians to string jewelry may very well make us re-think how necklace components can be used, not-considered by either modern necklace designers nor archaeologists.

Peruvian precolumbian jewelry can be massive, as in the beaded pectorals of Moche royalty at Sipan, measuring sixty centimeters wide (Donnan 1993), or can have large individual elements, as in the inlaid shell components of Tiahuanaco-Wari necklaces (Gessler 1988: 50-51). However, most intact jewelry fragments I have seen are modest in scale and not complex, except possibly in their construction, sometimes involving braiding (Gessler 1988). The fragments of the Wari influenced necklace differ in both the delicacy of their components and in the intricacy of how these elements were assembled with cord. Just like how ancient Peruvian beaders at Chancay employed simple disk beads as spacers, as well as real spacers with multiple perforations (Liu 2008: 52), I do not think contemporary necklace designers, with our linear thinking, would have been able to put together this necklace like their original stringers did some one thousand to thirteen hundred years ago, using the ingenuity of stringing via grooves or knotting together thin elements into broader masses.

WARI MOTHER-OF-PEARL CARVED/INLAID BIRD COMPONENTS AND STAIRCASE SPONDYLUS AND MOP NECKLACE ELEMENTS, OBVERSE AND REVERSE; all these beads have two perforations and are drilled on the reverse side with edge perforations, except at one narrow end of the staircase beads. This type of drilling is easier than trying to drill through such thin pieces of material. Staircase elements are approximately 1.6 centimeters wide while the bird beads are 1.3 to 1.6 centimeters wide, with the latter having inlaid spondylus or turquoise eyes. The staircase strand stringing is contemporary but the method is ancient, as the same use of edge perforations is seen in an intact strand fragment (Liu 2008: 51). Most modern necklace makers would not want to have exposed thread showing on the reverse side, subject possibly to the most wear.

DETAILS OF WARI INFLUENCE NECKLACE, showing unique ways of stringing; note spun cotton cord has multiple threads. If all these elements were loose, most likely no modern restorer would have deduced how they were used, especially the way the x-shaped components are tied to either the drilled bars or to the drilled or zig-zag vertical elements. The vertically-oriented elements are strung like the two intact bracelets, by the cord being wound around the end grooves. They differ in that there is no knot in-between the bracelet elements, as there is in the necklace. The closeup at the bottom of the page is approximately 60.1 centimeters wide. The practice of knotting in-between elements can be seen in many portions of the necklace fragments, like contemporary pearls are treated. Note on facing page how this very delicate necklace has very different designs on the front and back portions. This delicacy of structure and stringing contrasts greatly with intact prehistoric Southwest jewelry (Liu 2009, 2011).

 

Art Seymour Preview 37.5

PREVIEW

Glass beads have spawned a fair share of maestros, but Art Seymour’s name is forever entwined with the chevron bead. No other contemporary beadmaker has approached making chevrons of such quality.