Featured Thoughts On Chevron Trade Bead

Nowt wrong with Indian millefiori.

 

I still would say it's an original old rosetta bead = uncut chevron. Although yours looks slightly cut.
Off course indian, as those were crazy about them getting and buying them. Even used as currency long time, and therefor hard to date exactly.
These (museum collection) come from the Asanti.

But who am i.

 

That's interesting. Thanks for the response!

 

That image comes from my previous reaction with link ...

You could look more there.
I'm no expert. Just know 'some' about those.

 

Tie, I wish I would have seen this before. But anyway, I agree with the beadman (of course!), it is clearly recent Indian, and I am sorry to say, nowhere near the quality of Murano.
One clue is the great number of bubble holes on the cut sides, which are not even seen on better quality Indian (they make some excellent beads). So to answer your question, yes those would detract from the value.
The muted colours are another indication that it can't possibly be Murano.

However, chevron beads are always attractive, so it has that going for it.
Selling the bead separately won't work since these come in large bags for little money. So I would sell it in a lot, or sell it as part of a pretty string of mixed beads.
It can still be called a trade bead imo, since many of these beads end up in Indian and Nepali tribal necklaces and are part of a rural trade network.

As a general comment, India has a tradition of trade bead making going back thousands of years. It has also had trade contacts with ancient Middle Eastern glass and stone bead making centres, with China, and with the masters of millefiore in East Java. And later on with European traders, which is when they would have seen Murano and Dutch beads.

 

Next discussion? Ok then, i quess that official museum (dutch National Museum of World Cultures) and it's specialists (earlier image and link) are wrong.
https://www.tropenmuseum.nl/en

Nah, no other discusion for me. One is enough. I'll be the smartest one from now on.

 

It is clear from my post that I was talking about tie's bead, not any beads anyone else may or may not have posted.
I agree with the internationally renowned beadman who also only referred to tie's bead.

So for those who still don't understand, tie's bead looks and is very different from the one posted on the previous page.

I wish some people would stop making everything about them and ruining every thread they post in by being needlessly argumentative.
Yes you, Wout, and I am not in the mood, so you can continue to pick fights with anyone but me.

 

I am. Just said that.

Busy right now at the moment adding my ignore list some more to avoid such discussions in the future.

 

Thank you for the additional information, AJ! My original plan was to include it in a lot of beads that I'm in the process of throwing together. I just didn't want to sell something off to regret it later. There's so many out there for sale; it was hard to know who knows what they're talking about...lol.

The beadman provided some links that I'm going to peruse to get a better understanding of how to tell where the bead is from and how old it is. Thanks again!

 

Hey folks,

I messed up on the first page and my apologies to @Woutinc & @Any Jewelry for any misunderstandings this may have led to.

I had posted a picture of another bead on the 1st page in the comments. I decided to edit and delete it, and I ended up deleting the picture but not the entire post. I think Woutinc saw my post before I edited it and replied to it. I think this led to some confusion in further posts. I made things even worse when I incorrectly attributed to komokwa for one of woutinc's posts.

I would ask @i need help to delete this entire thread or lock it, if that's possible. My apologies again.

 

Always good to ask first. And you got to know the beadman.