OJS at Oregondigital.org (Oregon State University / University of Oregon)

Romancing The Hidden Bead, Peter Francis, Jr. (1992, 21:12-15

Francis, Jr., Peter

37
Robert, Paul 
1966 Dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue 
Française. Société de Nouveau Littré le Robert, Paris. 
Simpson, J.A. and E.S.C. Weiner 
1989 The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. Vol. 1. Clarendon 
Press, Oxford. 
21.  ROMANCING THE HIDDEN BEAD, Peter Francis, 
Jr. (1992, 21:12-15)
The uses of beads are legion. One which has not been 
examined has implications for researchers and for those who 
use beads. It has only rarely been reported, and the sources 
are difficult to access, so I shall quote most of them at some 
length. 
Quarm (1989:47-48), in an unpublished “long paper” (a 
sort of bachelor’s thesis) at the University of Ghana, Legon, 
reported the results of an extensive survey conducted by him 
and his classmates from different ethnic groups in Ghana. In 
his section on the uses of beads he stated (I have made a few 
minor corrections):
The rattling of beads is said to arouse sexual interest, 
especially in men. An informant at Ahwanease 
of an advanced age told me that the feeling of it 
is sufficient to awaken an impotent penis (name 
withheld for courtesy). Whereas it serves as an 
invitation to sex (or twe draa as the Akan call it) in 
bed it is considered as a plaything for the men. This 
was mainly expressed by informants above forty 
years [in age]. The young men and women appeared 
to be quite ignorant of that experience. This notion 
of bead use is, however, common in all the areas I 
visited . 
... In the Asante, Akim, Nzima and Aowin areas, I 
learned that one can swear on oath by one’s wife’s 
waist beads. Bead are held sacred and it is believed 
to bring bad [luck] if one gives a false statement or 
evidence. This sacredness stems from the fact that 
some beads are believed to possess some productive 
influence on the women’s fertility potential and this 
could be impaired in the case of falsehood. [A shrine 
attendant and a queen mother told me] that the telling 
of the kind and colours of beads a married woman 
wears by [to?] a man is tantamount to adultery and 
the person can be sued for damages. 
The erotic use of beads worn around the waist and 
under the skirts of women is (or was) widespread among 
several groups in Ghana. The “bead dance” of the Laobe 
of Senegal appears to have such connotations (Opper and 
Opper 1989:5), and the private erotic use of beads has been 
confirmed for Senegal and Mali by Marie-José Opper (1992: 
pers. comm.). 
A similar account was given by El-Tunisi (El-Tounsy 
1851:334-335) when discussing beads in Wadai, now part of 
Chad. El-Tunisi lived in Wadai in 1811-1812. The following 
is my translation from the French by Perron: 
These two types of beads are employed by the Fors 
as a hidden ornament, that is to say... in a sort of 
girdle worn next to the skin. The intention of this 
type of adornment is to excite the voluptuous 
emotions of the men, who are provoked and excited 
by the hint of the light rattling of the girdles at the 
time of amorous contact. When one meets a women 
alone and wants to entice her, he touches the girdle 
and makes the beads rattle. If the women appears to 
accept the provocation and does not distance herself 
immediately, he will take her hand and they will 
come to terms. If the woman repels him, he will go 
on his way. 
What proves that the Fors do not wear these girdles 
of beads in order to hear the rattling by accident, is 
that the first turn is very solidly fixed to the loins, 
whereas the others are mobile and almost floating. 
The beads which El-Tunisi just discussed were the 
mangoûr and the rougâd-el-fâqah, The mangoûr were 
yellow and green furnace-wound beads made in Hebron in 
the West Bank, which have more recently been recycled by 
Hausa traders who ground their ends flat and now sell them 
as “Kano Beads” (Francis 1990a:23-26). It is not clear what 
sort of beads the rougâd-el-fâqah were. El-Tunisi described 
them as smoother and more beautiful than the mangoûr. 
They were also more expensive and worn by the wealthier 
Fors (El-Tounsy 1851:334). 
El-Tunisi also discussed a bead called khaddoûr. 
These he said were long and white, red or blue (El-Tounsy 
1851:339). They were little esteemed and worn by the poor 
and servants. The word khaddur in Arabic means hidden. 
El-Tunisi had also discussed them in Darfur, in modern 
Sudan, where he lived from the age of 14 (1803 to 1811) 
before moving on to Wadai and then home to Tunisia. While 
he does not specify their use, he hints at it: 
Around the loins and against the skin, the Fors wear 
different sorts of beads. Among the rich women the 
beads are the size of a nut, and are called rougâd-el-
fâqah (the sleep of tranquility); among the women 
of medium means, it is the mangour, and among 
the poor women, the harich or the khaddoûr. These 
beads are made in Syria (El-Tounsy 1845:210). 
38
It appears that El-Tunisi is indicating that all these beads 
serve the same purpose, the choice of bead largely made by 
the economic status of the woman wearing them. The bead 
not discussed above, the harich, is merely a smaller version 
of the mangoûr. 
In 1873-1874, Gustav Nachtigal visited Wadai and 
Darfur. His account often mentioned beads and he included 
khaddur in several lists of beads. On one occasion in Wadai 
he described it thus:
In addition to the cotton goods which have been 
mentioned, imports from Cairo include the large red 
clay beads which, with the name khaddur, “hidden”, 
are used as women’s ornaments, worn under their 
clothing around the waist, large amber beads, and 
small quantities of silk, velvet, cloth, and shirting 
(Fisher, Fisher, and O’Fahey 1971:201). 
According to El-Tunisi, the khaddur were made in Syria 
(that is, Hebron). Nachtigal says they were from Cairo, but 
they may have only been brought from there. Nachtigal says 
they were clay. This may account for their relative poor 
standing among the beads El-Tunisi discussed, despite their 
large size. On the other hand, it is difficult to see how clay 
beads would rattle very well, unless they were glazed, which 
might explain why El-Tunisi said they were red, white, and 
blue in color. Their exact identification must await further 
work. 
In any case, it appears likely that these beads are no 
longer being used for this purpose. They were out of style 
in Darfur in the 1930s (Arkell 1937). Whether other beads 
have replaced them is not known.
What we do have, however, is confirmation of the erotic 
uses of beads worn on women’s waists under their skirts 
in what are now five modern sub-Saharan nations:  Ghana, 
Senegal, Mali, Chad, and Sudan. These countries are not 
all contiguous, and if linked they would form a broad band 
across the continent. In how many other places is (or was) 
this a custom? Soliciting answers to this question is a major 
reason for writing this note. 
Another reason for this note is the significance of this 
practice to bead researchers. A few years ago Karlis Karklins 
went through the African photographic collections of the 
ethnographic departments of several of Europe’s major 
museums. He was perturbed to find relatively few pictures 
of beads being worn in West Africa (Karklins 1988: pers. 
comm.).
I have observed the same effect in similar collections 
in the U.S. and West Africa. It is well known that there 
are a lot of beads in West Africa. This is obvious from the 
vast quantities coming onto Western markets from there. 
Trade figures which have been published for Senegal and 
Gambia (Curtin 1975:252, 1978:88, 90) and Ghana (Francis 
1990b:6-7, 1992) show that glass beads and beads of other 
types were imported in large numbers by Europeans to their 
colonies over the last few centuries. Now we know why they 
are not visible in photographs:  we have been looking in the 
wrong places (I shall refrain from suggesting how we might 
look in the right places). 
References Cited
Arkell, A.J. 
1937 Hebron Beads in Darfur. Sudan Notes and Records 
20(2):300-305. 
Curtin, Philip D. 
1975 Economic Change in Precolonial Africa:  Senegambia 
in the Era of the Slave Trade. University of Washington 
Press, Madison. 
1978 Economic Change in Precolonial Africa:  Supplementary 
Evidence. University of Washington Press, Madison. 
Fisher, Allan G.B., Humphrey J. Fisher, and Rex S. 
O’Fahey (eds). 
1971 Sahara and Sudan. Volume Four:  Wadai and Darfur 
by Gustav Nachtigal. University of California Press, 
Berkeley.
Francis, Peter, Jr. 
1990a Beadmaking in Islam: The African Trade and the Rise of 
Hebron. Beads 2:15-28. 
1990b Beads in Ghana (West Africa), Part I. The Margaretologist 
3(1):3-12.
Opper, Marie-José and Howard Opper 
1989 A Custom Among the Laobe Women of Senegal. The Bead 
Society of Greater Washington Newsletter 6(2):5. 
Quarm, Kwasi Dankama 
1989 The Use of Beads in Selected Contemporary and Traditional 
Ghanaian Societies as Illustrated Through Ethnographic, 
Historical and Archaeological Evidence. Unpublished 
manuscript. Department of Archaeology, University of 
Ghana, Legon. 
El-Tounsy, Mohammed Ebn-Omar (transl. by Dr. Perron)
1845 Voyage au Durfour. Benjamin Duprat, Paris. 
1851 Voyage au Ouaday. Duprat, Betrand, Frank, Renouard, and 
Gide, Paris. 


English

Romancing the Hidden Bead

Some Comments On Mulberry And Twisted Square Beads, By Karlis Karklins (1987, 11:12-14

Karklins, Karlis

62
30). However, with the craze for Birmingham steel jewellery 
that had begun in 1760 at an end (F. Buckley, 1933, Old 
English Glass, Glass 10:322-323), the number of metal 
beadmakers began to decline and by mid-century they are 
no longer listed in the directories. During this same time 
period the number of glass-beadmakers remained relatively 
constant; bird’s (and doll’s?) eyes seem to have been one of 
their principal products. 
Makers of gold and silver beads appear in the directories 
in the 1870s and are pretty well a constant thereafter. A 
manufacturer of steel beads appeared briefly in the directory 
listings in the 1890s, apparently prompting one of the 
precious metal beadmakers to announce that he could also 
provide beads of the base metals. Glass beads cease to be 
mentioned after 1895, suggesting that they were no longer 
being made or at least not in significant numbers. 
Beads of gold, silver, and other metals were the 
principal products of the Birmingham bead industry in 
the present century although “crinoid and Galalith* beads 
and necklets” were apparently also produced around 1925 
(Kelly’s Directory, p. 1036). (*Galalith was a type of black 
casein plastic.) At least one manufacturer of gold and silver 
beads was still active in 1973 but has since apparently 
discontinued production. 
While the directories reveal what materials were used 
to produce beads in Birmingham and when, they are mute 
when it comes to such questions as what specific types of 
beads were made, in what quantities, and where were they 
marketed? Can anyone provide the answers or help flesh out 
the aforegoing history? 
38.  SOME COMMENTS ON MULBERRY AND 
TWISTED SQUARE BEADS, by Karlis Karklins (1987, 
11:12-14)
Despite years of research on Dutch beads, the answer 
to Peter’s query, “mulberries and twisted squares–who 
made them?,” remains a big question mark. Actually, both 
bead types have been found in and around Amsterdam in 
archaeological contexts that date to 1670-1750, and a few 
have been found in association with bead manufacturing 
waste. Unfortunately, it is waste derived from the 
production of drawn beads, not wound beads. Thus, there 
is no archaeological evidence for the manufacture of wound 
beads in Amsterdam. However, this does not necessarily 
mean that they were never made there; the archaeologist’s 
trowel may yet unearth the evidence. 
The fact that there is no record of a glass bead factory 
in The Netherlands during the 18th century is not relevant 
as the factories produced drawn beads; the wound mulberry 
and twisted square beads would have been the products of a 
cottage industry, with workers scattered all over Amsterdam 
or some other center. Neither does the absence of mulberry 
and twisted square beads at such North American Dutch 
sites as Fort Orange negate a Dutch origin for the beads. 
Holland ceded New Netherland to England in 1664 and the 
final Dutch occupation of Fort Orange was in 1674, just 
at the beginning of the temporal range for the bead types 
under discussion. In fact, twisted square beads are relatively 
common in archaeological contexts on the Caribbean 
island of St. Eustatius which the Dutch retained (personal 
observation). 
Although the Dutch no longer governed New 
Netherland, they continued to live and trade there. There is 
solid historical evidence that the Dutch were also supplying 
beads to the English and French during 18th century 
(Karklins 1982:113), and it is highly likely that at least some 
of the beads described by Brain (1979) and Good (1972) 
were supplied by the Dutch. The question that arises here 
is:  “Were the beads that came from Holland made there, 
or was Holland just a warehouse for the beads produced by 
other countries?” Unfortunately, this question will remain 
unanswerable until we have comparative material from 17th-
19th-century bead-production sites elsewhere in Europe, 
especially Venice. 
References Cited
Brain, Jeffrey P. 
1979 Tunica Treasure. Harvard University, Papers of the 
Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 71. 
Good, Mary Elizabeth 
1972 Guebert Site:  An 18th Century, Historic Kaskaskia Indian 
Village in Randolph County, Illinois. Central States 
Archaeological Societies, Memoir 2. 
Karklins, Karlis 
1983 Dutch Trade Beads in North America. In “Proceedings of 
the 1982 Glass Trade Bead Conference,” edited by Charles 
F. Hayes III. Rochester Museum and Science Center, 
Research Records 16:111-126. 
39.  BEADS FROM THE WRECK OF THE DUTCH 
EAST INDIAMAN DE LIEFDE (1711), by Karlis 
Karklins (1988, 12:11-17) 
Introduction
In October of 1711, the Amsterdam chamber of 
the Dutch United East India Company or Vereenigde 


Some Comments on Mulberry and Twisted Square Beads

Glass Beadmaking In The Fichtel- Gebirge Region of Bavaria in the Mid- Nineteenth Century, by Ian Kenyon, Susan Kenyon, Susan Aufreiter, And Ron Hancock (1996, 28:12-19

Kenyon,  Ian

Kenyon, Susan

Aufreiter, Susan

Hancock, Ron

Glass Beadmaking in the Fichtelgebirge Region of Bavaria in the Mid-nineteenth Century

Beads Link San Salvador to a Columbus Trip, by The New York Times (1983, 3:7-8

The New York Times

wearing beads!” DB Sepan explains, “and how can you talk 
to them if you don’t see them?” 
Conversely, if a person saw spirits inadvertently, and 
was not wearing beads, she might find the experience too 
overwhelming. Beads can strengthen her soul so she can 
stand her ground and carry out her function as mediatrix 
between the human and the spirit world successfully.
Endnotes
1. The tuai gawai is an official who knows the necessary 
procedures, chants, etc., for the festivals; he may also 
be a dukun (shamanistic healer). The dayung baris is a 
necessary accessory to the healing rites; she does not 
usually undertake them on her own. 
2. The likis beads, or blue, green, amber, or clear glass, 
are extremely hard to date. Large numbers of them 
must have been available throughout the Victorian 
age and well into this century. See P. Francis, Jr., on 
“Peking Glass.”
3. For a fuller discussion of blue beads, see Munan 
(1981). 
4. This opinion seems to be confined to Bidayuh (Land 
Dayak ) groups (Munan 1981). 
5. Mainly Islam and Christianity; or the latter, some 
groups are more tolerant than others of heathen 
vestiges.
6. The yellow “doughnut” bead is common throughout 
the Insulindies (Lamb 1961). It was kiln-baked of 
glass powder made from imported beads in Tanjong 
Selor on the East Kalimantan coast, specially for the 
Central Borneo trade, as recently as the 1930s (Tillema 
1938). 
References Cited
Francis, Peter, Jr. 
1990 Peking Glass Beads. Ornament 14(2):66-67, 69. 
Lamb, Alastair
1961 Some Glass Beads from Kakao Island, Takuapa, South 
Thailand. Federation Museums Journal 6. 
Munan-Oettli, Adelheid (Heidi Munan) 
1981 Bead Necklace 1598 in the Sarawak Museum Collection. 
Sarawak Museum Journal 29(50):17-26. 
Tillema, H.F.
1938 Apo-Kajan–een filmreis naar en door Central-Borneo. Van 
Munster, Amsterdam.
66.  BEADS LINK SAN SALVADOR TO A COLUMBUS 
TRIP, by The New York Times (1983, 3:7-8)
NASSAU (Reuters) - Beads and other ancient European-
made items found by American archaeologists could be the 
long-awaited proof that Columbus made his 1492 landing in 
the New World on the Bahamian island of San Salvador. In a 
recent report to the Bahamian Government, the archaeologists 
said that last July they found four green and yellow glass 
beads, two brass buckles, metal spikes, and a fragment of 
Spanish crockery mixed with native Arawak Indian pottery 
and shell beads. Although Indian pottery dating to the ninth 
century has been dug up along San Salvador’s coastline, no 
European artifacts of the Columbus period were previously 
Figure 2. The author’s niece wearing a pangeh. This is a posed 
photo; she would neither wear the cotton cap nor the beads “for 
real.”
102
found. The artifacts linked to Columbus were found eight 
inches beneath the surface, said Charles Hoffman of 
Northern Arizona University, who helped supervise the 
excavation. “I knew that if this was where Columbus landed 
we should unearth some evidence of Spanish contact,” Mr. 
Hoffman said in his report. “Needless to say, the entire crew 
is elated with the finds.” Marvin Smith, an archaeologist of 
the University of Florida, said he dated the beads from 1490 
to 1560. “They are the type of beads Columbus was using, 
according to his journals,” Mr. Smith said in an interview. 
“It looks very possible that they were his.” Columbus’s log 
relates that his crewmen traded beads, buckles, and rings 
with Indians they met on the island the Indians called 
“Guanahani,” believed to be San Salvador.... (The New York 
Times, September 15, 1983, p. A12)
67.  SUMMARY OF AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL 
RESEARCH MISSION TO EASTERN SENEGAL, by 
Marie-José Opper (1990, 16:13-15)
A grant from The Bead Society of Los Angeles allowed 
me to travel to extreme eastern Senegal in February, 1990, 
in order to co-organize and participate in an archaeological 
research project in collaboration with the Prehistory and 
Protohistory Department of the Institut Fondamental 
d’Afrique Noire (IFAN) headquartered in Dakar, the capital 
of Senegal. 
Several sites were investigated during the 20-day 
mission. Dating from the neolithic period to the 20th century, 
they yielded a number of beads, adornments, and fetishes. 
For the most part, these sites are located in a region that 
is sparsely inhabited and far from “civilization.” The work 
was often accomplished under very harsh conditions due to 
the lack of roads or tracks, unavailability of potable water, 
extremely high daytime temperatures, and the presence 
of potentially dangerous animals such as “dog-headed” 
baboons and lions. Confirmed reports of lions attacking cow 
herds in the area forced the investigators to abandon their 
outdoor camp on the banks of the Falémé River. 
One of the sites yielded a particularly interesting 
number of artifacts including 23 beads made of bone, 
shell, carnelian, stone, copper, ceramic, and glass; spindle 
whorls; a fishnet weight; two complete ceramic bracelets 
and pieces of others; two zoomorphic ceramic statuettes; 
a ceramic statuette with a phallic symbol at one extremity 
and the head of a female at the other (apparently a fertility 
fetish); and several polished tools including a millstone, 
pestles, and hand axes. Numerous potsherds were found 
on the surface. Measuring approximately one kilometer by 
400 meters, the site was utilized during the Neolithic period 
(when it was an important stone-working center) and the 
subsequent Iron Age. 
The beads, along with one bone pendant, were discovered 
at opposite ends of the site. At locus no. 1, situated at the 
summit of a small butte, the beads, the bone pendant, and 
several spindle whorls were found within a 100 m diameter, 
either on the surface or just below it (not deeper than 1 cm). 
The protohistoric layer did not go any deeper than 5 cm. 
Below this, the Neolothic layer did not exceed 10 cm. Mixed 
material from the different layers was found in the gullies 
along the butte’s slope. 
Similarly, at locus no. 2, the Iron-Age layer did not 
exceed 5 cm in depth and the beads were discovered either 
on the surface or just below it. A Neolithic layer was not 
discovered, despite the presence of a polished hematite hand 
axe and a solitary carnelian bead of Neolithic workmanship. 
Also discovered at locus no. 2 were the three fetishes, the 
earthenware bracelets, a fragmentary bronze bead, as well 
as a splendid polished millstone. The bracelets, the bronze 
fragment, and one cylindrical blue-glass bead were found 
near the remains of a stone foundation which was thoroughly 
investigated by the mission team. Test trenches dug to a 
depth of 5 cm proved to be sterile. On the surface, however, 
abundant pottery sherds were found, examples of which are 
currently being studied at the IFAN laboratories in Dakar. 
Unfortunately, the lack of meaningful archaeological 
layers, frequent brush fires, and the presence of wild animals 
at the site did not allow for the establishment of precise 
dating procedures in the field. However, two carnelian beads 
were found which, unlike the one of Neolithic manufacture, 
resemble similar beads found in Senegalese tumuli dating to 
the 11th century.
Six of the eight glass beads found at the site are drawn 
cylinders displaying a cobalt blue color at first glance. When 
held up to the light, however, several of these beads appear 
to be greenish yellow, like the dichroic beads discussed by 
Davison, Giauque, and Clark (Two Chemical Groups of 
Dichroic Glass Beads from West Africa, 1971, Man, vol. 6, 
no. 4). At IFAN, similar beads are recorded as having been 
found at the ruins of the medieval town of Koumbi-Saleh, 
believed to be the capital of the ancient Ghana Empire, as 
well as at the Djenne and Gao sites in what is now Mali. A 
fragment of one of the glass beads found in Senegal will be 
analyzed to see if it can be attributed to the Medieval period 
of Arab trade in the area. 
The two other glass beads represent different types 
altogether. One is a small annular form emerald green in 
color. The other is pyramidal and opaque black. The latter 
bead was apparently decorated with a single raised spot 
of opaque white on one side. The two extremities of the 
103


Beads Link San Salvador to a Columbus Trip

Summary Of An Archaeological Research Mission To Eastern Senegal, By Marie-José Opper (1990, 16:13-15

Opper, Marie-José

found. The artifacts linked to Columbus were found eight 
inches beneath the surface, said Charles Hoffman of 
Northern Arizona University, who helped supervise the 
excavation. “I knew that if this was where Columbus landed 
we should unearth some evidence of Spanish contact,” Mr. 
Hoffman said in his report. “Needless to say, the entire crew 
is elated with the finds.” Marvin Smith, an archaeologist of 
the University of Florida, said he dated the beads from 1490 
to 1560. “They are the type of beads Columbus was using, 
according to his journals,” Mr. Smith said in an interview. 
“It looks very possible that they were his.” Columbus’s log 
relates that his crewmen traded beads, buckles, and rings 
with Indians they met on the island the Indians called 
“Guanahani,” believed to be San Salvador.... (The New York 
Times, September 15, 1983, p. A12)
67.  SUMMARY OF AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL 
RESEARCH MISSION TO EASTERN SENEGAL, by 
Marie-José Opper (1990, 16:13-15)
A grant from The Bead Society of Los Angeles allowed 
me to travel to extreme eastern Senegal in February, 1990, 
in order to co-organize and participate in an archaeological 
research project in collaboration with the Prehistory and 
Protohistory Department of the Institut Fondamental 
d’Afrique Noire (IFAN) headquartered in Dakar, the capital 
of Senegal. 
Several sites were investigated during the 20-day 
mission. Dating from the neolithic period to the 20th century, 
they yielded a number of beads, adornments, and fetishes. 
For the most part, these sites are located in a region that 
is sparsely inhabited and far from “civilization.” The work 
was often accomplished under very harsh conditions due to 
the lack of roads or tracks, unavailability of potable water, 
extremely high daytime temperatures, and the presence 
of potentially dangerous animals such as “dog-headed” 
baboons and lions. Confirmed reports of lions attacking cow 
herds in the area forced the investigators to abandon their 
outdoor camp on the banks of the Falémé River. 
One of the sites yielded a particularly interesting 
number of artifacts including 23 beads made of bone, 
shell, carnelian, stone, copper, ceramic, and glass; spindle 
whorls; a fishnet weight; two complete ceramic bracelets 
and pieces of others; two zoomorphic ceramic statuettes; 
a ceramic statuette with a phallic symbol at one extremity 
and the head of a female at the other (apparently a fertility 
fetish); and several polished tools including a millstone, 
pestles, and hand axes. Numerous potsherds were found 
on the surface. Measuring approximately one kilometer by 
400 meters, the site was utilized during the Neolithic period 
(when it was an important stone-working center) and the 
subsequent Iron Age. 
The beads, along with one bone pendant, were discovered 
at opposite ends of the site. At locus no. 1, situated at the 
summit of a small butte, the beads, the bone pendant, and 
several spindle whorls were found within a 100 m diameter, 
either on the surface or just below it (not deeper than 1 cm). 
The protohistoric layer did not go any deeper than 5 cm. 
Below this, the Neolothic layer did not exceed 10 cm. Mixed 
material from the different layers was found in the gullies 
along the butte’s slope. 
Similarly, at locus no. 2, the Iron-Age layer did not 
exceed 5 cm in depth and the beads were discovered either 
on the surface or just below it. A Neolithic layer was not 
discovered, despite the presence of a polished hematite hand 
axe and a solitary carnelian bead of Neolithic workmanship. 
Also discovered at locus no. 2 were the three fetishes, the 
earthenware bracelets, a fragmentary bronze bead, as well 
as a splendid polished millstone. The bracelets, the bronze 
fragment, and one cylindrical blue-glass bead were found 
near the remains of a stone foundation which was thoroughly 
investigated by the mission team. Test trenches dug to a 
depth of 5 cm proved to be sterile. On the surface, however, 
abundant pottery sherds were found, examples of which are 
currently being studied at the IFAN laboratories in Dakar. 
Unfortunately, the lack of meaningful archaeological 
layers, frequent brush fires, and the presence of wild animals 
at the site did not allow for the establishment of precise 
dating procedures in the field. However, two carnelian beads 
were found which, unlike the one of Neolithic manufacture, 
resemble similar beads found in Senegalese tumuli dating to 
the 11th century.
Six of the eight glass beads found at the site are drawn 
cylinders displaying a cobalt blue color at first glance. When 
held up to the light, however, several of these beads appear 
to be greenish yellow, like the dichroic beads discussed by 
Davison, Giauque, and Clark (Two Chemical Groups of 
Dichroic Glass Beads from West Africa, 1971, Man, vol. 6, 
no. 4). At IFAN, similar beads are recorded as having been 
found at the ruins of the medieval town of Koumbi-Saleh, 
believed to be the capital of the ancient Ghana Empire, as 
well as at the Djenne and Gao sites in what is now Mali. A 
fragment of one of the glass beads found in Senegal will be 
analyzed to see if it can be attributed to the Medieval period 
of Arab trade in the area. 
The two other glass beads represent different types 
altogether. One is a small annular form emerald green in 
color. The other is pyramidal and opaque black. The latter 
bead was apparently decorated with a single raised spot 
of opaque white on one side. The two extremities of the 
103
perforation have very different dimensions. Beads of this 
type have been found at several Medieval sites in West 
Africa. No glass beads of European manufacture were found 
at the Senegal site, nor were any discovered within a 5-km 
radius of the site. However, another drawn cylindrical blue 
bead similar to those found at locus no. 1 was discovered 
some 15 km away along with pestles, polished stones, and 
numerous potsherds. 
These sites are located well within the Galam-Bambouk 
auriferous region. The gold found in the area was the main 
contributor to the wealth and importance of the empire that 
existed during the Middle Ages. The presence of the three 
fetishes indicates the probability of animistic practices in a 
region that was yet to experience the period of Islamization 
that took place during the 11th century, after the annihilation 
of the Ghana Empire by the Almoravides. 
The recovered ancient beads were undoubtedly traded 
for the gold that was (and still is) found in the Falémé 
River, close to the site. Although the source of these beads 
is not certain, it is probable that the specimens entered 
eastern Senegal via the caravan routes that led south from 
Morocco. 
68.  PALAU:  THE GLASS PALACE, by  Marie-José 
Opper (1991, 19:11-13)
Palau de Vidre is the Catalan name of a small village in 
southern France where the foothills of the Pyrenees meet the 
Mediterranean Sea. The village has maintained its original 
name to this day, some 330 years after the region became a 
part of France. Before that, the region of Catalonia belonged 
to the kingdom of Spain. Palau de Vidre translates as “Glass 
Palace.” However, despite documentation showing that 
numerous and well-known glass factories existed in the area 
during the Middle Ages, no solid archaeological evidence 
has yet been discovered. 
Glass slag found in stratified archaeological layers 
attests to the existence of glass factories during the Roman 
occupation (200 B.C. to A.D. 300), and, in 1983, the local 
archaeologist, Annie Pezin, found 11 monochrome green 
and reddish-brown glass beads in the tomb of a small child 
dating to the third century. Located at chest level, the beads 
were either part of a necklace or a decorated piece of clothing. 
The form of most of the beads was irregular-annular (Fig. 1), 
with an average diameter of 5 mm and an average thickness 
of 1 mm. Also found were two green faceted stone beads, 
one round black stone bead, and a silver ring. 
Numerous other glass beads dating from different 
periods have also been discovered locally at Iberian, 
Phoenician, and Visigoth sites. Beads have also been found in 
the Medieval tombs of travelers going to and from Santiago 
de Compostela, a pilgrimage center in northwest Spain. 
Palau de Vidre is situated along the banks of the Tech 
River, an ideal location for the establishment of glassmaking 
activities. The Tech furnishes an excellent-quality sand for 
this purpose, and the plants that grow in the briny marsh 
area are an abundant and perfect source of material for the 
fabrication of soda, an important ingredient in the glassmaking 
process. The neighboring forests provided wood to fuel the 
factory ovens. Palau was also situated close to major trade 
routes, as well as to the port at nearby Collioure, from which 
all the maritime commerce of northern Catalonia arrived 
and departed. The naval flotilla based at Collioure was both 
powerful and well known. Important commercial exchanges 
took place with North African Mediterranean countries 
including Egypt and Syria, which were the preferred 
markets for Catalan traders. In return for their merchandise, 
these traders obtained silk, gold, leather, spices, and slaves. 
Alice Frothingham (1963) also informs us that “Catalan sea 
captains trading in the Eastern Mediterranean brought back 
rare glasses from Alexandria, Beirut and Damascus.” 
The kings of Aragon took up residence in Collioure 
and, in 1396, one of the queens accorded the inhabitants 
the right to receive pirates and corsairs in the port for the 
purpose of trade. During this time, southern France was also 
an exporter of glass objects. One of the first indications of 
this trade concerns the export of a case of glass to Algeria 
in 1302 (Foy 1989:378). Catalan glass factories were able to 
perfectly imitate glass fabricated in Damascus and Venice. 
By the 15th century, Catalonia had become a major glass- 
producing center. In addition to “tableware,” the factories 
made “beads for rosaries, necklaces and trimming for ladies’ 
gowns” (Frothingham 1963:23). These objects were sold 
locally by traders of general merchandise and notions who 
worked at markets or were traveling salesmen. 
From its renowned past, Palau has conserved its original 
name. Today, one of the tourist attractions in the village is 
a collection of necklaces composed of old beads created 
hy a local designer and sold in the campground boutique. 
The necklaces are made using glass beads from mortuary 
wreaths that have been discarded because they are too 
damaged to remain on tombs in the village cemetery. This 
type of beaded wreath was very popular in France from the 
end of the 19th century to just before the start of World War 
Figure 1. The various forms of glass beads from Palau 
de Vidre, France; approximately life size (black = black, 
stippled = green, and hatched =  red). 
104


Summary of an Archaeological Research Mission to Eastern Senegal

Russian Beads And Beadwork – 1881, By Pottery And Glassware Reporter (1989, 14:14

Pottery and Glassware Reporte

Newcomb, pp. 129-162. Final Report to the National 
Science Foundation, Grant Gs-964.
Hsu, Dick Ping 
1969 The Arthur Patterson Site:  A Mid-Nineteenth Century 
Site, San Jacinto County, Texas. Texas State Building 
Commission, Archaeological Survey Report 5. 
Karklins, Karlis 
1992 Trade Ornament Usage Among the Native Peoples of 
Canada:  A Source Book. National Historic Sites, Parks 
Service, Studies in Archaeology, Architecture and History, 
Ottawa, Ontario. 
McCrocklin, Claude 
1990 The Red River Coushatta Indian Villages of Northwest 
Louisiana, 1790-1835. Louisiana Archaeology 12:129-
178. 
National Archives 
1809- Natchitoches-Sulphur Fork Agency Ledgers. Record
1821  Group T1029. Washington, D.C. 
Perttula, Timothy K. 
1993 European Trade Goods at an Early Nineteenth Century 
Koasati Village in Southeast Texas. Unpublished 
manuscript. Texas Historical Commission, Austin. 
Ross, Lester A. 
1990 Trade Beads from Hudson’s Bay Company Fort Vancouver 
(1829-1860), Vancouver, Washington. Beads: Journal of 
the Society of Bead Researchers 2:29-67.
Watt, Frank H. 
1937 Descriptive Analysis of Glass Indian Trade Beads found in 
Central Texas. Central Texas Archeologist 3:61-67. 
Winfrey, Dorman H. and James J. Day (eds.) 
1966 The Indian Papers of Texas and the Southwest, 1825-1916. 
5 vols. Pemberton Press, Austin. 
75.  RUSSIAN BEADS AND BEADWORK – 1881, by 
Pottery and Glassware Reporter (1989, 14:14)
[Ed. note:  Little is known about the production of beads 
and beaded ornaments in Imperial Russia. The following 
item, extracted from the Pottery and Glassware Reporter 
13(7):24-29 (December 3, 1885), throws some additional 
light on the subject.] 
In the manufacture of small articles or vases from 
glass, in 1881, 214 kustars [domestic or cottage artisans] 
in the government of Moscow produced goods valued at 
37,000 rubles ($13,500). The nature of this special industry 
was bead-working, having its origin in the glass or crystal 
produced in two kustar glass works in the Demetrieff district. 
The beads, &c., made at these works are confined to eight 
colors-opal, black, rose, dark red, green, blue, turquoise 
and amber. In 1881 the output was 4,500 poods (162,000 
pounds), valued at 11,625 rubles ($5,625). These beads are 
purchased by the kustars and strung upon wires and strong 
twines, such wares finding ready sales among the peasantry 
at all fairs and bazaars in the interior and eastern provinces 
of the empire. The annual receipts of two families engaged 
in the preparation of such articles or wares is about 200 
rubles ($100). The weekly labor of an adult bead worker is 
from 50 copecks to 2 rubles (25 cents to $1), and of a female 
bead threader from 30 to 50 copecks (15 to 25 cents). These 
wares, however, are sold at prices commensurate with such 
remuneration. Thus, 1,000 buttons or studs cost 3 rubles 
($1.50); 1,000 necklaces, 2 rubles ($1) and ear rings cost 
from 5 to 12 rubles (2.50 to $6) per 1,000. 
76.  HOW BEADS ARE MADE – 1890, by The Pottery 
Gazette (1987, 11:2-8) 
It sounds almost incredible, but is nevertheless a fact, 
that it would take a dozen locomotive engines to transport 
the weight of glass beads annually purchased by the fair 
sex. 
The best customers of all are the French, and next to 
them come the Spaniards of Europe and America; while 
among the German nations it would seem, according to the 
testimony of Herr Gampe, that the purer the race, the less 
the fondness for beads. Thus the Yankees show how mixed 
their blood is, by buying almost as many beads as the French 
and the Spaniards; the English are not such good customers, 
but they imported 2,204,241 lbs. in the year 1871; while the 
Germans stand third on the list, and the Scandinavians last. 
The latter are, perhaps, too sober minded, and grave to care 
for such frivolous vanities. 
Of the Turks and Hungarians, only the upper classes 
wear beads at all, as they would be quite out of keeping with 
the national costumes of the people. 
As a rule, the civilised European, no matter what her 
nationality, buys only the cheaper kinds of glass-beads, and 
leaves the best and most expensive for the barbarous and 
semi-barbarous natives of India and Africa. Strings of beads 
adorn the throat, neck, hair, arms, and ankles of the Hindu 
and Malay, and often enough form the sole costume of the 
Ethiopian, and in the interior of Africa they frequently take 
the place of money as a medium of exchange. 
111


Russian Beads and Beadwork–1881

Comments On “Rare” Melon-Shaped Chevrons, By Jürgen Busch (1997, 31:8-11

Busch, Jürgen

16
components into a consistent whole. The main 
documentary sources are:  Capitanato Provinciale 
(1803-1806); Camera di Commercio (1806-1870); 
Commissione di Sorveglianza alle fabbriche ed arti 
privilegiate nel recinto del Portofranco di Venezia 
(1830-1873), hereafter Porto Franco. 
3. This documentary void is partly due to our limiting 
the research to the so-called “Privileged factories.” 
A possible development of this research will include 
recognition of licences assigned by the mayor (through 
the Chamber of Commerce) to all the active craftsmen, 
as explained in L. Alberti, Quadro del sistema di 
commercio e d’industria vigente nelle provincie venete, 
Venice, 1823. 
4. ASV, Camera di Commercio, b. 23 (1818), t. III, 
fasc. 10. In 1826, only the duty on the soda coming 
from Pola (Dalmatia) was abolished (ASV, Camera di 
Commercio, b. 52 [1826], t. III, fasc. 2). 
5. ASV, Camera di Commercio, b. 29 (1820), t. III, 
fasc. 9. 
6. ASV, Camera di Commercio, b. 52 (1826). 
7. This mechanism is not very clear and will require 
further research to be fully understood.
8. A form of Privilege certainly existed at least since 
1822, as Dal Mistro is reported as a “national privileged 
factory” in that year (ASV, Camera di Commercio, 
b. 82 (1826), t. III, fasc. 4). However, it is not clear 
whether this first Privilege system applied to exports 
abroad or not. 
9. ASV, Camera di Commercio, b. 59 (1828), t. III, 
fasc. 4. 
10. ASV, Porto Franco, b. 12 (1833-47), t. X, fasc. 13. 
11. ASV, Porto Franco, b. 54 (1845-73), t. VIII, fasc. 3. 
12. ASV, Porto Franco, b. 54 (1845-73), t. VIII, fasc. 4. 
13. ASV, Porto Franco, b. 12 (1830-44), t. X, fasc. 5. See 
also ASV, Porto Franco b. 75 (1845-73), t. LI, fasc. 1.
14. ASV, Porto Franco b. 75 (1845-73), t. LI, fasc. 10. 
15. ASV, Porto Franco b. 12 (1830-44), t. X, fasc. 4. 
16. ASV, Porto Franco b. 12, (1830-44), t. X, fasc. 18. 
17. ASV, Porto Franco b. 54 (1845-73), t. VIII, fasc. 4. 
18. Data concerning production quantities were gathered 
by Silvia Ferrari and will be available soon. 
19. In the bead industry, the existence of a mass of 
working people who were escaping the official system 
and ways of control is evident since the 18th century, 
as noted by F. Trivellato, “Echi della periferia. Note 
sulla circolazione e la produzione delle perle di 
vetro veneziane nei secoli XVII-XVIII,” La ricerca 
folklorica, 1996, (34):25-34. 
20. This is particularly true for the invention of new 
enamels, the introduction of new textures and colors, 
and the like. The most famous case is Bigaglia’s 
aventurina, but many others were awarded prizes during 
these years for their innovative work. See V. Mutinelli, 
Annali delle Provincie Venete (1816-40), Venice, 1843, 
and the Atti dell’Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere 
ed Arti. As to the process of mechanization, on the 
contrary, Venetians appear to have been slow and not 
very innovative. 
4.  COMMENTS ON “RARE” MELON-SHAPED 
CHEVRONS, by Jürgen Busch (1997, 31:8-11)
Marie-José Opper’s note in Bead Forum #30 on a 
melon-shaped Italian chevron bead found in the northern 
Mauritanian holy city of Chinguetti requires some corrections 
and additions. Locally called sria, the antique, small, seven-
layered, melon-shaped chevrons are said to be “rare” by 
Mrs. Opper. This is somewhat misleading. Among the 2,000 
chevron beads depicted by John and Ruth Picard (1986, 
1993), one is a melon-shaped type. Three specimens of this 
kind (including one in a “rare” blue-green color), against 
200 in “traditional” shape, are in the author’s collection 
(Fig. 1); one is in Mrs. Opper’s hands. Five “melons” in 
relation to approximately 2,400 pieces in traditional shape 
result in a percentage of ca. 0.2%. This percentage would be 
significantly higher (4.5%) if only the author’s collection is 
considered, revealing that melon-shaped chevrons are not 
as “rare” as Mrs. Opper believes. Since no records exist of 
Italy’s total chevron-bead production (some hundred million 
pieces may be just a pessimistic assumption) it is hard to 
estimate how many melon-shaped chevrons are represented 
by 0.2% in absolute numbers. 
A knowledge of Mauritanian bead prices and local 
women’s bead preferences leads me to disagree with 
Opper’s statement that such sria are “highly prized” in 
Mauritania. In my experience, chevron beads are neither 
particularly highly valued nor expensive. “Highly prized” 
is a relative and confusing term (in the Mauritanian bead 
17
context anyway). Especially in Mauritanian bead markets, 
“highly prized” must be understood as meaning nothing but 
“highly priced!”
Religious prestige and the magical aura of a bead are 
the main parameters for value in the Mauritanian bead 
market. Beads with this reputation are automatically both 
“highly prized” and “highly priced!” Is this the case with 
chevrons in Mauritania? It is definitely not! The three 
dollars apiece I regularly paid for them between 1992-1996 
explains their status and value better than words. One thing 
is clear:  chevrons are cheap in Mauritania, especially in 
a market where certain kinds of glass beads (e.g., simple 
monochrome nila beads [blue glass beads of uncertain 
origin] and the morfia [Fustat Fused-Rod Beads] imported 
from Egypt) reach high-end prices comparable with the top 
beads on the U.S. bead market. 
It should also be kept in mind that different ethnic 
groups set different values on the same kinds of beads. 
While a southern Sudani may pay ten dollars for a chevron 
bead, the northern Beidani may refuse it for three. Generally 
speaking, glass beads of European origin (including 
chevrons) are neither as expensive nor as “highly prized” 
in Mauritania as seems to be assumed by some researchers, 
especially in comparison with the country’s West African 
neighbors. A few Hausa traders, mainly in the capital, offer 
some strings of Italian “trade beads” to foreigners, but the 
traditional Mauritanian bead market is completely in the 
hands of local women. Compared to beads of stone, metal, 
wood, amber, and coral, European glass beads, including 
chevrons, are under-represented, but not rare. Thus, “highly 
prized” is the wrong term to describe the value of any 
chevrons in Mauritania! 
Mrs. Opper continues that the trans-Saharan route, 
located just 4 km from the town of Chinguetti where the 
melon-shaped sria was found, “linked southern Morocco 
with the Adrar, a mountainous region located in what is 
now Algeria and Niger.” This is in error! Opper obviously 
confuses the northern Mauritanian Adrar province around 
Chinguetti with an area called Adrar des Iforas in what is 
now Algeria and Mali (not Algeria and Niger). This area is 
located 40 caravan days or 1,000 miles to the east (Fig. 2). 
This route once connected southern Morocco’s commercial 
center Sigilmassa in the Tafilalet oasis with Tadmekka 
(Es Souk, Arabic for “the market”) at the southern edge 
of Adrar des Iforas. Thus, this route cannot be considered 
when asking how this bead might have reached Chinguetti. 
Assuming that Mrs. Opper meant the indirect and minor 
Morocco-Adrar route (from Sigilmassa to Awlil via Nul, 
Idjil, and Asugi to Chinguetti), it raises the question whether 
European products, like glass beads, were traded on inner 
Saharan routes during the late Middle Ages. Since the 16th 
century, routes close to the coast (Sigilmassa-Sila/Takrur 
on the lower Senegal River is one example where glass 
beads were reported as a trade item) were given preference, 
mainly for better security. However, early beads could also 
have gotten to the Sahara by the overland route. In contrast 
to Mrs. Opper, I would suggest that glass beads intended 
for the West Saharan trade primarily came in through West 
African ports, at least since the early 16th century. 
Chinguetti developed into a city in the second half of 
the 15th century; therefore, the “late Middle Ages” would 
be more precise than just “the Middle Ages” for dating it 
as stated by Mrs. Opper. It is also significant to note that 
Chinguetti, one-dimensionally described by Opper as a 
“major relay point for caravans...,” is also an important 
religious center, one of the seven holy cities of Islam. It 
has the third-oldest African mosque, dating from the 13th 
century, and is one “meeting point” for western Saharan 
pilgrims joining the yearly caravans for the hadj to Mecca.
Opper’s question as to why chevrons can be found in 
Mauritania when they were also exported to the Americas by 
16th-century explorers is odd. Chevron beads are found in 
many parts of the world from Madagascar to the Philippines 
(Francis 1993), not only in the Americas and West Africa. 
Finally, measurements should have been provided, 
not just the statement that the melon-shaped chevron was 
“small.” [Ed. note:  There was a metric scale in the photograph 
submitted by Mrs. Opper but it was cropped from the photo 
to save space; the specimen is ca. 7 mm in diameter.] 
References Cited 
Francis, Peter, Jr. 
1993 Where Beads are Loved (Ghana. West Africa). Beads and 
People Series 2. Lapis Route Books, Lake Placid. N.Y. 
Figure 1. Three melon-shaped seven-layered chevron heads (the 
middle one with a “rare” blue-green outer layer) acquired in Tichitt 
and Oualata, Mauritania, in 1993-1995 (photo:  J. Busch).
18
Picard, John and Ruth Picard 
1986 Chevron Beads in the West African Trade. Beads from the 
West African Trade Series 1. Carmel, California. 
1993 Chevron and Nueva Cadiz Beads. Beads from the West 
African Trade Series 7. Carmel, California.
5.  A NOTE ON THE NEUTRON ACTIVATION 
ANALYSIS OF 16TH- AND 17TH-CENTURY BLUE 
GLASS TRADE BEADS FROM THE EASTERN 
GREAT LAKES, by Anne Chafe, Ron Hancock, and Ian 
Kenyon (1986, 9:13-18)
By the late 16th century, European-made glass trade 
beads were reaching the Native peoples of the eastern Great 
Lakes. From this time until the mid-17th century, beads of 
blue glass were widely traded items, being about as common 
in regions dominated by the French trade (Ontario) as by the 
Dutch (New York). 
Although there is a wide range of blues observed in the 
glass trade beads of this period, there are two modal hues. One 
is a turquoise blue (hue about 2.5PB to 7.5B in the Munsell 
notation) called “robin’s egg blue” in the Kidds’ 1970 
typological system (bead varieties IIa40, 41, 42, depending 
on the particular bead form), with some specimens tending 
towards “cerulean blue” (IIa44), “brite copen blue” (IIa45), 
and “shadow blue” (IIa46, 47). The second modal blue is a 
very dark, more purplish blue (about 7.5PB) which is called 
“brite navy” in the Kidds’ system (varieties IIa55, 56, 57, 
depending on shape). This is the same blue that appears on 
the outer layer of “star” or “chevron” beads (IIIk3, IIIm1). 
Although certain bead types can be used to identify 
particular time horizons or even European-centered trading 
zones, the turquoise blue beads (IIa40) have an extremely 
wide time-space distribution; that is, their presence on a site 
is not diagnostic. Yet, do these IIa40 beads in fact represent a 
homogeneous group or are there subtle differences through 
time or over space? More generally, why do there seem to be 
two basic colors of blue in these early historic trade beads? 
Furthermore, why is there a tendency for the turquoise blue 
glass beads on late 16th-century sites to be found in a highly 
disintegrated condition? To answer these questions, it seems 
that we must go “into” the beads, and look at their chemical 
composition. Other chemical analyses incorporating Great 
Lakes material have been reported by Karklins (1983) and 
Lewis (1979). 
Consequently, 88 blue glass beads were selected 
for non-destructive neutron activation analysis using the 
SLOWPOKE Reactor Facility at the University of Toronto. 
Figure 2. Map of West Africa showing the locations of the places and routes referred to in the text (drawing:  J. 
Busch).


Comments on “Rare” Melon-shaped Chevrons

Early Post-Contact Native-Made Glass Beads In America?, By Peter Francis, Jr. (1983, 2:5-6

2) marine species are often found at inland sites; what 
mechanism brought them there?; 3) how were they treated 
to be formed into beads?; and 4) to what purpose were they 
put? 
I do not claim to be able to answer all these questions, 
but I have been working on some of them and would like to 
share the highlights of what I have learned. 
1) Age and Distribution:  Not unexpectedly, shell ranks 
as one of the oldest and most wide-spread bead materials. 
Shell beads are found in the earliest assemblages of Europe, 
China (Choukoutein Upper Cave), and India (Patne, 
Maharashtra). The picture is likely true for the Americas; 
I would appreciate knowing more details from there. To 
form an idea of materials used in the Upper Paleolithic for 
beads, I tallied those listed in Muller-Karpe’s Handbuch 
Der Vorgeschichte (1966). Excluding the very detailed 
Petersfels, Germany, materials from 31 European sites were 
as follows: 
Material # of pieces # of sites 
Shell 898 11
Tooth (inc. ivory) 351 21
Bone 68 16
Stone (chalk, jet) 7 5
Wood (!) 6 1
Shell was clearly one of the more important materials, 
though not as widely distributed as bone or tooth. The 
number of pieces was skewed by large finds at 2 sites. 
2) Transportation mechanisms: Here we know very 
little. Several possibilities exist:  trade, gift-giving, raids, 
expeditions, etc. I would appreciate more ethnographic data 
from America on this point. Certainly trade was used, but 
Forde mentions the Yokuts (Calif.) making long expeditions 
into enemy territory to gather shells. 
3) Worked into beads:  I conducted a series of 
experiments on common bead shells. A full paper has been 
submitted; some of the results are as follows:  
a) Shells most commonly worked (at least in Old 
World contexts) are those with certain advantages–the 
pre-perforated Dentalium, the animal absorbing the 
columella so only the apex needs removal (Oliva, 
Conus), or a very large fina1 whorl (Cypraea, Nerita);
b) 5 methods have been described in the literature 
for perforating shells. Of them, gouging with a stone 
point is efficient for thin shells, but does not work on 
thick ones. Hammering with a stone is very efficient 
on thick shells, and with practice will work on thin 
ones. Grinding against a flat stone is efficient in tool 
wear and leaves a nice, smooth hole. Sawing with a 
blade takes a long time and is hard on the tool (used 
surface-found chalcedonic blades picked up locally). 
Scratching with a point is hard on the tool and takes a 
very long time (one clam took nearly 3 hours). 
c) Shells at a site can probably be considered used for 
beads if they are found in context (i.e., burial), part of a 
series of similarly worked shells, or have been clearly 
man-perforated. 
d) Man-made perforations can often be recognized: 
flattened surfaces from grinding, many furrows from 
scratching (which otherwise looks rather like drilling), 
deep furrows from sawing; hammering and gouging 
leave similar jagged holes. 
4) Use of shells: Though much has been collected 
already, we can use more ethnographic data. Primary uses 
are decoration, currency, and status symbols. Magic, curios, 
or souvenirs are other uses. This will vary greatly between 
groups.
13.  EARLY POST-CONTACT NATIVE-MADE GLASS 
BEADS IN AMERICA?, by Peter Francis, Jr. (1983, 
2:5-6)
Small, light to dark translucent green beads found in 
Peru and Ecuador have recently come to the attention of 
several of our members. They vary in shape from sub-oblate 
and donut to cylindrical and in size from 3 to 8 mm or more 
in diameter. They are distinguished by poorly fused bubbly 
glass, conical perforations with rough surfaces on the end 
with the small hole, and bubbles oriented along the axis of 
the perforations. 
The beads were first reported by Harris and Liu 
(Ornament, 1979, 4[2]:60). Experiments by Harris indicated 
that they might have been made by heating a small bit of glass 
in a crucible and piercing it with a hot pointed metal tool. 
The technique was within the ability of early metalsmiths 
in the region, and it was hypothesized that the beads were 
locally made by the natives soon after Spanish contact. 
Smith and Good (Early 16th Century Glass Beads in the 
Spanish Colonial Trade, 1982, p. 20) have questioned this 
idea. They classify the beads as wound, and state the clarity 
of the glass is unlike native-made beads from Africa and N. 
America. Smith has expressed to me (letters 23 June 1982 & 
9 May 1983) that glass bottles are rare on European sites of 
28
29
the early 1500s and that the natives may not have had access 
to glass for making such beads. The many bubbles in these 
beads also suggest to him that European glass bottles did not 
furnish the raw material for making the beads. 
In the absence of archaeological proof, we can try to 
resolve these differences by asking: 1) is the experimental 
technique likely to have been used for making beads?, 2) 
are the beads’ characteristics those which would match this 
technique?, and 3) did the natives have access to glass for 
possibly making such beads? 
In addition to Harris’ experiments, Harris and Liu 
noted beads made in a similar method in India, citing van 
der Sleen (Handbook, 1975, pp. 27, 74; the perforation in 
his Fig. 40, p. 68, illustrating one such bead is at variance 
with the presumed method of manufacture). Sleen was 
relying on Dikshit, who mentioned beads made by heating 
and “piercing” in several papers. Dikshit has interpreted 
a passage of Kautilya’s Arthasastra (ca. 4th c. A.D.) as a 
reference to this beadmaking technique (East & West, 1965, 
15[1-2]:67) and said that he had witnessed the process 
himself being used at Ghodegere, Karnataka. 
Dikshit further said that such beads had been found at 
Indian sites from early A.D., especially Ahichchhatra and 
Kondapur. Though I have examined some of the beads from 
these sites, none appear to have been made by heating and 
piercing a bit of glass. However, 2 beads from Kolhapur do 
seem to have been made this way; they are dark opaque blue 
with conical perforations and flat disc profiles. 
Smith and I have discussed the green beads from S. 
America and examined such beads together in the collection 
of the University of Florida. I pointed out to him that the 
clarity of the glass is not a problem in this case, as the beads 
were not apparently made by the powder-glass method 
used in Africa and N. America. Glass beads made at Bida, 
Nigeria, by melting bottles and winding the glass as it melts 
are also very bubbly. He now agrees that the beads we have 
examined together do not appear to have been wound. 
There remains the question of where the natives may 
have gotten the glass. Early explorers to the New World 
report that the natives wanted and were given not only glass 
beads but also pieces of glass or glass sherds. In October 
1492, Columbus gave away pieces of glass on 3 occasions 
(S.E. Morison, 1967, Journals and Other Documents, pp. 
67, 75, 79). 
The Chimu Incas of Peru are known to have used 
European glass for a green glaze on some very early post-
contact pottery (Bushnell, 1957, p. 137). The natives would 
not likely have had complete glass vessels, but pieces of 
glass given to them by Europeans with no further use for 
them or picked up around European settlements would not 
have been impossible for them to obtain. 
In sum, the technique of heating a bit of glass in a 
crucible or mold or alternately dropping a bit of molten glass 
on a clay plate and piercing it with a pointed nail or similar 
metal object is a viable one for making small glass beads. The 
beads under discussion do appear to have the characteristics 
of beads made in this way; the conical perforations and 
roughened surface on one end are similar to Indian beads 
made in this manner, and the orientation of the bubbles 
toward and down through the perforations also suggest the 
technique. A limited number of glass sherds were available 
to S. American natives immediately after contact, and in at 
least one case (glazed pottery) are documented as having 
been recycled by them. Their metalsmiths, unacquainted 
with glassworking, could have mastered and even invented 
this piercing technique. 
Further work is necessary to determine exactly which 
peoples might have made these beads. It is interesting to 
note that they were the only beads used in burials of the 
Manteno culture before 1550. 
14.  BEADMAKERS’ STRIKE IN INDIA, by Peter 
Francis, Jr. (1984, 5:7-8)
February and early March just weren’t the same in 
Papanaidupet. The village of 12,000 in southern Andhra 
Pradesh state provides all India with small drawn glass beads 
and marbles. But the tube-drawers working at 24 furnaces in 
the village had stopped drawing. 
Tube-drawers come in pairs:  one to manage the lada 
or ladi, a tapered tube which holds the glass as it is being 
drawn, and another to draw the tube out hand- over-hand 
for three hours running. The pair are paid 22 rupees a day 
(11 each), while the minimum daily wage for a man and 
the average daily per capita income is 5 rupees (a rupee is 
currently worth 9 cents U.S.). But they have also been forced 
to pay rent to the owners of the furnaces where they draw the 
tubes. So they drew the line at drawing glass tubes. 
The issue highlights the “feudal” structure of the 
Papanaidupet glass bead industry. Two dozen families own 
furnaces and the land on which they are built. Some 300 
men find work at the tube-drawing furnaces or the 30 small 
heating-and-tumbling units. Many people cut tubes and size 
and string beads–perhaps 5,000 altogether, counting women 
who do occasional stringing in neighboring villages. At the 
top of the ladder are four families who market the beads, 
some of whom make their own raw glass. 


Early Post-contact Native-made Glass Beads in America?

Notes on Some Forum Articles, by Peter Francis, Jr. (1995, 26:4-7

41
2) One such rod was found at Fustat, as reported both 
by Pinder-Wilson and Scanlon, and myself. 
Mrs. Spaer may well have identified a somewhat 
different bead, made by a similar but not precisely same 
method. That suggests a different beadmaking location, 
since all beads found at Fustat were apparently made with 
rods, not wedge-shaped slices of glass. Where that might 
have been is certainly worth investigating. 
We also need more data on the distribution of the beads. 
Spaer has indicated that they may be relatively widespread. 
However, if she has worked entirely from publications, 
it may have been difficult to identify these beads and 
distinguish them from those decorated with trailed lines 
later combed into herringbone patterns. What is needed is 
firsthand investigation of the reported beads.
24.  NOTES ON SOME FORUM ARTICLES, by Peter 
Francis, Jr. (1995, 26:4-7)
This note was originally to have been for Ellen 
FitzSimmons, whose article on Tairona “tinklers” caught 
my eye. However, I have since accumulated other data of 
interest and am presenting them here as well. 
Re:  “Pre-Columbian Tairona Tinklers” (Bead Forum 
23:11-14)
I was surprised to read that Caribbean and South 
American scholars refer to these shells as “tinklers” or 
“whistles.” Had they looked a little further north, they would 
have had a completely different view of them. 
Oliva shells like those illustrated are present in numerous 
Mexican museums, especially in the Maya sections, always 
strung as necklaces. Collections that come to mind include 
the National Museum of Anthropology in Mexico, the 
Mérida Regional Museum of Archaeology, the museum at 
La Bolom Institute in San Cristóbal de las Casas, and the 
Chiapas Regional Museum in Tuxtla Gutiérrez. 
Nor are these stringings arbitrary. Numerous examples 
of these shells being worn exist on statuary. I shall cite 
one spectacular example:  a life-size hollow clay figure 
from the Late Classical (ca. A.D. 600-900) site of El 
Zapotel in Veracruz. The female figure wears an enormous 
collar consisting of up to eight rows of what are probably 
Marginella shells. Around her waist is a row of large shells 
with the spires sticking out; they are likely to be Olivas. 
Safer and Gill (1982:153-155) discuss the use of Oliva 
shells in conjunction with the Zapotec god Xipe Totec, the 
god of rain. They report the finding of rattles made of these 
shells and the use of the shells mounted on sticks which are 
hit on the ground to make noise during the rain ceremony 
of the Otomi. 
Oliva shells are also depicted in the painted manuscripts 
often collectively known as codices. The ones involved 
come from the Zapotec-Mixtec tradition. The Codex Borgia 
(lam. 64) is a production that antedates the conquest. Codex 
Vaticanus 3738 and its cruder non-native copy, Codex Rios, 
both show the wearing of Oliva shells by common people of 
the time (Códice Rios 1900:lam. 57v, 59r, 60r). 
An even more sophisticated development is the elaborate 
carving of Oliva shells to resemble human faces. One 
example is in the Chiapas Regional Museum and another, 
recovered from the sacred cenote at Chichen Itza, is in the 
Mérida Regional Museum. The large ellipsoidal perforation 
on the dorsal side is incorporated as a mouth. Incidentally, 
this perforation is created by sawing. Ms. FitzSimmons 
might enjoy reading Francis (1989) where more detailed 
experiments are actually illustrated. 
Re:  “A Note from 1878 on Glass Beadmaking” (Bead 
Forum 24:5-6) 
So as not to disappoint Rick Sprague, I shall offer a 
comment on his note concerning the production of beads 
“by twisting glass threads spirally....” The description sounds 
like what is known as the Venetian variety of “satin glass,” 
as opposed to the Bohemian variety. The beads themselves 
must have been expensive. They are rarely seen; there is 
only one in the Center’s collection (Francis 1988:Color Pl. 
D 16). 
The largest group of them that I know of are on a sample 
card in the Glass Museum of Murano, a slide of which was 
kindly donated to the Center by Peter Pratt. They fill most 
of the card on slide no. 4 (B2, 101-250), which is helpfully 
marked Vetro alla Lucérna (lamp glass). There also appear 
to be a few on the Giacomuzzi cards (ca. 1852-1870) in The 
Bead Museum in Prescott, Arizona.
Re:  “The Illicit Bead Trade in Gao” (Bead Forum 
24:6-10) 
Thanks very much to Timothy Insoll for his article calling 
attention to the destruction of the archaeological site of Gao, 
Mali. Similar devastating practices have been documented 
all around the world (Francis 1987). While Insoll is no 
doubt correct that many beads looted from Gao are sold in 
Mauritania, many of them end up in the hands of Western, 
especially American, collectors. He would be shocked by the 
size and extent of bead assemblages held in dealer’s stocks 
and private collections, all gleefully represented as having 
been “excavated” from Jenné, Timbuktu, or wherever. 
Society members should make it a priority to educate 
themselves and others about this terrible situation. While 
there is some demand within West Africa itself, the real 
money and the real incentive come from outside. The halting 
of demand from the rich nations for these antiquities would 
go far in slowing the looting Insoll describes.
Re:  A Query Concerning a Mayan Practice (Bead Forum 
1:8) 
And now to answer one of my own questions. In the very 
first issue of The Bead Forum (1:8), I asked for references to 
a practice described in a popular journal of the Maya tying 
a bead to the hair of babies to dangle between their eyes to 
make them cross-eyed. Peter Pratt (Bead Forum 2:8) sent 
quotations from Coe and Morely. Coe (1966:144) said the 
parents hung small beads on the noses of the children (not 
easily envisioned), and Morely (1956:163) said they used 
little balls of resin dangling from the ends of the children’s 
hair. Now there were three different accounts and no original 
source. 
I now believe I have found one. Fray Diego Landa was 
one of a handful of Spanish clerics generally empathetic to 
the native peoples of the Americas. His mission was in the 
Yucatan where Maya culture still furnished. His Relacion 
de las Co sas de Yucatán is a work of sympathetic, careful 
observation on all aspects of post-classic Maya culture. He 
wrote:  “It was held as a grace to be cross-eyed, and this was 
artificially brought about by the mothers, who in infancy 
suspended a small plaster from the hair down between the 
eyebrows and reaching the eyes; this constantly binding, they 
finally became cross-eyed” (Gates 1978:33). I also consulted 
a Spanish edition and the word in question is pegotillo, the 
diminutive of pegote which is sticking-plaster. 
Sadly, no beads were involved and, even more sadly, 
they were not attached to the nose; Morely clearly had a 
better idea of the practice. Maybe this information only 
pleases me, but I have been wondering about it for a dozen 
years. 
References Cited
Codex Borgia 
1976 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Cod. Borg. Messicano 1) 
(commentary by Karl A. Nowtony). Akademische Druck-
u. Verlagsanstalt, Graz. 
Codex Vaticanus 3738 
1979 Codices Selecti LXV. Akademische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, 
Graz. 
Códice Rios 
1900 Il manuscritto messicano vaticano 3738, detto il Codice 
Rios. Stablimento Danesi. 
Francis, Peter, Jr. 
1987 The Endangered Bead. Ornament 11(1):64-73. 
1988 The Glass Trade Beads of Europe:  Their Manufacture, 
Their History, and Their Identification. The World of Beads 
Monograph Series 8, Lapis Route, Lake Placid. 
1989 The Manufacture of Beads from Shell. In “Proceedings 
of the 1986 Shell Bead Conference,” edited by Charles 
F. Hayes III. Rochester Museum and Science Center, 
Research Records 20:25-35.
Gates, William (tsl.) 
1978 Yucatan Before and After the Conquest. Dover, New York. 
Safer, Jane F. and Frances M. Gill 
1982 Spirals from the Sea:  An Anthropological Look at Shells. 
Clarkson N. Potter, New York. 
25.  SOME NOTES ON ARTICLES IN BEADS, by Peter 
Francis, Jr. (1996, 28:10-12)
First of all, congratulations to Karlis Karklins for 
continuing to make Beads the single best source of 
information on international bead research. The following 
are additions to two of my own articles in that journal 
concerning beads in the Middle East and one which Karlis 
reprinted for our benefit. 
“Beads of the Early Islamic Period,” Beads 1
The mystery of the bead wasters pictured in Plate IIA 
and discussed as part of the Fouqi Collection on pp. 29-30 is 
now solved. In the storerooms of the Allard Pierson Museum 
in Amsterdam is material known to have been found at 
Fustat. It is very like the wasters discussed in my paper, but 
even more convincing of an Early Islamic date because of 
its provenience and because several unfinished beads are 
among the finds. The specimens are mosaic beads formed 
without a core in the manner typical of the Early Islamic 
period. I now have no doubt that this is what they are. 
42


Notes on Some Forum Articles

Notes On The European Bead Industry– 1897, By Albert Hartshorne (1986, 9:20

Hartshorne, Albert

Gronenborn, D. 
1998 Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Investigations Along 
the Southern Fringes of Lake Chad, 1993-1996. The 
African Archaeological Review 15(4):225-260.
2000 Mai-mbauji–Eine Studie über Entstehung und Wandel 
eisenzeitlich-historischer Fürtstentümer im südlichen 
Tschadbecken (7./8. Jahrhundert n. Chr. bis ca. 1925). 
Unpublished Habilitation-Dissertation. Johann Wolfgang 
Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt am Main. 
2001 Kanem-Borno. A Brief Summary of the History and 
Archaeology of an Empire in the Central “bilad el-
Sudan.” In West Africa During the Atlantic Slave Trade: 
Archaeological Perspectives. Leicester University Press, 
London. 
Hogendorn, J. and M. Johnson
1986 The Shell Money of the Slave Trade. Cambridge University 
Press, London. 
Holl, A. 
1988 Houlouf I. Archéologie des sociétés protohistoriques du 
Nord-Cameroun. BAR International Series 456. Oxford. 
Holl, A.F.C. 
1995 Réseaux d’échanges préhistoriques dans la plaine 
tchadienne. Sahara 7:17-28. 
Insoll, T. 
1997 Iron Age Gao: An Archaeological Contribution. Journal of 
African History 38:1-30. 
Insoll, T. and T. Shaw 
1997 Gao and Igbo-Ukwu:  Beads, Interregional Trade, and 
Beyond. African Archaeological Review 14(1):9-23. 
Lebeuf, J.-P. 
1981 Travaux archéologiques dans les basses vallées du Chari 
et du Logone (1936-1980). Académie des Inscriptions & 
Belle-Lettres. Comptes Rendus 1980, pp. 636-656. Paris. 
Lebeuf, J.-P., A.M.-D. Lebeuf, F. Treinen-Claustre, and J. 
Courtin
1980 Le gisement Sao de Mdaga (Tchad). Fouilles 1960-1968. 
Societé d’Ethnographie, Paris. 
Levtzion, N. and J.F.F. Hopkins 
1981 Corpus of Early Arabic Sources for West African History. 
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 
MacEachern, S. 
1993 Selling the Iron for their Shackles:  Wandala-Montagnard 
Interactions in Northern Cameroon. Journal of African 
History 34:247-270. 
Passarge, S. 
1895 Adamaua. Bericht über die Expedition des Deutschen 
Kamerun-Komitees in den Jahren 1893/94. Dietrich 
Reimer, Berlin. 
Perdue, Th. 
1979 Slavery and the Evolution of Cherokee Society, 1540-1866. 
University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. 
Reyna, S.P. 
1990 Wars Without End. The Political Economy of a Precolonial 
African State. University Press of New England, Hanover. 
Thiemeyer, H. 
1997 Untersuchungen zur spätpleistozänen und holozänen 
Landschaftsentwicklung im Südwestlichen Tschadbecken 
(NE-Nigeria). Jenaer Geographische Schriften 5, Jena. 
Wesler, K. 
1999 Chronological Sequences in Nigerian Ceramics. African 
Archaeological Review 16(4):239-258.
30.  NOTES ON THE EUROPEAN BEAD INDUSTRY–
1897, by Albert Hartshorne (1986, 9:20) 
Up to about forty years ago beads of the ordinary self 
colours were made by small workers in Bethnal Green and 
Shoreditch [London]. They bought their coloured glass canes 
from the glass-makers and melted them at a jet, dropping the 
metal upon a copper wire coated with whitening, the wire 
being turned during the process, and when cold the beads 
would slip off. The men were, however, so careless and 
unpunctual that the trade came to an end. Bead-making at the 
present day is in continental hands, principally in the district 
of which Reichenberg, the second manufacturing town in 
Bohemia, is the centre. The largest export from hence is of 
glass beads coming chiefly from Gablonz and finding their 
principal market in Paris. Figured beads come from Venice 
as of yore. The opening up of Africa is giving an impetus 
to the trade, and an idea may be formed of its extent by the 
fact of between sixty and seventy tons of beads having been 
lately destroyed by fire on the premises of Mr. L. Levin, a 
bead merchant in Bevis Marks. (Albert Hartshorne, 1897, 
Old English Glasses, p. 106 n.) 
31.  A NOTE ON CHEVRON AND OTHER BEADS 
FROM TRINIDAD, by  Charles A. Hoffman and Thomas 
F. Lynch (1990, 17:14)
Two large, Spanish, faceted chevron beads were found 
in the Late Ceramic site of Mamoral, in central Trinidad. 
51


Not a member yet