Fredericks-McIntire & Partner Collection

In these two first grouping photographs of the beads, which will be taken down to the microscopic level to show why a bead is truly old and not a reproduction, we offer a sample of what we have acquired (Pre-UNESCO Treaty- imported into the US). In this first article on beads, we have only the space to show the positive authenticating identifiers to look for in old beads of this type. Our ongoing research into our collection will result in future articles comparing authentic beads with their later replications from the 17Th, 18Th and 19Th Centuries, and will run all the way to the modern reproductions so often sold as authentic. The lots we have purchased came to us from two ‘adventurer’ types who first acquired these beads (and other pottery items we obtained) in the  Mid-East and Far East countries, and had stored them in a desert warehouse since the early 60′s to early 70′s period. [Some of the Song Dynastic Period pottery items still have their original coal oil and other contents still inside, along with their original straw and cloth stoppers]. The boxes of pottery and bags of beads we acquired were filthy with old dust from their long storage here in the desert, and accompanying all such lots were the obligatory reproductions collected from that time period. In between work on our other authentications, we have investigated some of the beads and have taken their authentication to the extreme, even further than we do for most of the jades shown on our Timeless Jade web site. All of the beads above have been subjected to repeated soakings in acetone, light oxalic acid, light bleach and intensive scrubbing with high concentrations of soap and water, both inside the holes and on the external surfaces. They have also been shot with our high pressure water sprayer (which will put a hole in human skin, if caution is not used). What you will be seeing in the photographs in this article are totally “in-situ” condition beads with only portions of their original dirt removed during the cleaning process.There were no recent waxes or artificial treatments ever discovered on any of the beads shown above. Some residual iron deposits have been found on some of the beads we have looked at, simply because they had been kept for a period of time in a metal container long ago, and then, some of the beads were the best efforts of the replicators up until the 60′s – 70′s period (none of which are shown here, but will be shown in a future article).

In this article we will be staying away from all the ‘mystifying’ stories that surround such beads, and will leave everyone to their own beliefs and imaginings. We also will not be delving into the techniques of manufacture in any great length, as we simply do not know enough about this process. What we will show is how to tell the many different identifiers of authentic age that still, to date, cannot be duplicated by the best of the replicators. Ages will also be approximated based on basic research, as we were not there when they were made, nor when they were lost or buried.

show

In the four above photographs, we have a type of small bead that appears similar to a type of bead shown in the wonderful book on beads – The History of Beads From 100,000 B. C. to the Present, Revised And Expanded Edition by Lois Sherr Dubin, showing up on her timeline chart from the Pakistan area (India) at approximately 600 BCE. While her description of the beads pictured on her timeline state ‘banded agate’, these two particular beads show more of an ‘etched agate’ style, with their definitive white band, the result of intentionally-added alkali treatment. They may be the same type of bead as described, or perhaps they were from another valley or location, but by the type of wear and degradation to the original tooling marks, and the extremely dense covering of manganese to be seen in the last two above photos under 20X & 30X microscopic power respectively, we would have no problem saying these two beads would fall into the 600 BCE timeline. However, the very heavy white coating on the beads could lead to a later date, as we find this thicker-layered, fired-on coating to be more in line with later beads from India, which, most likely, eventually worked their way up into the Himalayas, by way of trade, etc. As will be seen in the photographs of the older, most likely Indus Valley Period beads (currently described as 2,500 – 1,500 BCE, with evidence showing the original culture could be much older, and coming down to the Indus Valley area from the foothills above), the alkaline coatings do not appear as heavily applied (some with three well-defined layers eroding away) as the two beads above. In the first two photographs above, we see the obvious wear on both of the beads, and an unusual green tinting in some areas. In some places, this green has actually penetrated the agate surface to a slight degree and could well be associated with some type of copper or copper alloy penetration, from either the original stringing of the beads or an associated burial object (if the beads were once burial items). As with all the beads we will be showing in this article, none of our treatments that expose reproduction dyeing techniques changed any of these beads in appearance (while it did on the artificially treated beads we handled in the same manner).

In the first photograph above, we see three authentic Three-Eyed zDi bead types that average between 15 – 17 mm in length. The two microscopic photos above (taken at 20X & 30X power respectively) and the three microscopic photographs to follow after this paragraph, are of the center bead in the top photograph. All three beads display exactly the same type of construction, degradation and manganese deposits, and were almost certainly from the same necklace at one time (as are the others we have that match these three). The manganese growth deposits shown in the bottom two microscopic photos are inside the suspension hole running through the bead. All these types of true manganese growths, which will be shown throughout this article, are naturally occurring, and are not the usual ‘burnt-on’ carbonized sugars, or black paints used to simulate manganese on many types of replications (these artificial applications would have come right off in the extensive cleaning process all the beads have undergone). In the top photograph, we can see the lack of uniformity common to true beads with age, as these would have been hand made, one-at-a-time, from different agates. The other extreme authenticator can be found in the oxidation seen on the outside of the beads, and especially on the inside, in the deep degradation appearing as the whitened area beneath the manganese growth. This is natural degradation to the agate and not the light acid-etching we would find on a simulated bead. Seeing this type of degradation to the inside of these beads would lead us to suspect a rather moist burial environment for an extended period of time . In one of our earlier Timeless Jade articles which shows this type of degradation on old Paleolithic agates from Agate Basin in Utah, USA (which has seen a much drier climate), we partially explained this type of degradation. I once thought it was mostly caused by ultraviolet light, but am now beginning to believe it is caused more by moisture in the environment, as would be suggested by the difference between the inside of these beads (showing much more depth of degradation) and the outside. There are absolutely no signs of any type of modern re-polishing efforts, under microscopic examination, on any of the beads we will be showing in this article. What we are finding is degradation being more in-tune to the varying environments to which all the different beads were subjected – some conditions drier, some moister, and some more subjected to freezing and thawing.

In the three photographs above, we see a section of the the Three-Eyed dZi bead under 10X, 20X and 30X microscopic power respectively. In the center of all three photos, we can define a triangular-shaped, manganese crystalline growth that lies in a slight depression in the bead. What truly defines the authentic age of the bead, in conjunction with the manganese growth, is the track ‘eaten’ into the bead by a root of some plant over an extended period of time. This type of identifier can be found on most types of objects of ancient burial, but on stone objects it obviously takes a longer period to achieve the degree of depth we see here, than it does on pottery objects, as shown in our last Timeless Artifact article on a restored Tang Dynasty camel with riders. It would also stand to reason that a softer type stone (like a steatite) would be effectively ‘eaten into’ more quickly than a harder agate. To us, the most interesting aspect of this tree root track is best shown in the first photo, as the track starts over the lower, white, fired-on alkali portion, travels over the lower agate surface, and then rises over the upper alkaline application. This is not an anomaly of the agate stone, and can only be produced naturally over time. Stylistically, we would put this set of beads at an early period in their history, perhaps somewhere in the early CE timeframe, from India, but they could have a  500 – 700 CE timeframe as well. We will leave this determination to the dZi bead experts; however, their age is not modern.

In the above two photographs, we see two different sides of what Lois Sherr Dubin describes in her fabulous, aforementioned book as a “pure” Nine-Eyed dZi bead. While she puts this type of bead on her timeline around the 700 CE era, she explains that no one is truly sure of their exact dating. What we see here is an exquisite example of a Nine-Eyed dZi bead, with no damaged areas having been re-glued together. Measuring approximately 5 cm in length, it is like all the later beads (shown first in this article; the older beads will be explored in the second part of this article); drilled from both ends, the holes never meet up perfectly in the middle, as they do in most of the newer modern-tooled beads. All patinas seen in these two photos, and the following microscopic photographs, is original and un-altered in any way.

The three above photographs were all taken at 30X microscopic power over different areas of the surface on the Nine-Eyed dZi bead. After repeated cleanings in the solutions mentioned above, along with the many scrubbings of the dZi bead, what we see above are soils and manganese deposits that are literally adhering to the surface of the bead due to the extended period of time this bead has been in soil-surrounded conditions. We can also see the natural cracking to the surface of an old bead which has more than likely gone through hundreds of years of freezing and thawing. We see this crazing effect more in some beads, and less in others. There are some beads in our collection that are extremely split, and chips are coming off the wider cracks as a result of the continual contraction and expansion from the temperature changes. Indeed, some of beads have been broken into parts and re-glued together, while some are just fragments of beads, showing entire open drilled areas that are very nice for studying the old drilling marks and through-degradation. The main reason we present these particular photos above is that they show the continuity of deposits on the outside surface to the inside of the drilled hole, of original soils and manganese growth, which will be shown in the following photographs taken at the edge of the drill hole.

In the two photographs above, we are looking at an edge-view of the Nine-Eyed dZi bead at 20X and 30X microscopic power respectively. As mentioned in the above paragraph, the soil and manganese deposits are adhering to the inside of the drill hole the same way as on the outside, with the only difference being that they are more abundant on the inside of the drill hole. Remembering that the inside of the drill holes on all the beads in this article have had the same type of cleaning and scrubbing (we like to use the bristle-brush pipe cleaners on the inside of these small-bore holes) as the outsides have undergone, we would view the inside of the hole being more impregnated with deposits as an indication that the outside of the bead endured more wind-weathering (wind polish), due to having spent more time exposed to the elements, with the hole having more tendency to fill with dirt and detritus, which would naturally leave more deposits while protecting the internal surface from abrasion. The naturally weathered drilling-tool-marks shown in the top portion of  the drill hole above demonstrate this effect of extreme weathering on this bead, while the dirt packed into the center of the hole prevented similar wind-polishing, except at the very edge of the hole, where swirling sand and dirt particles partially polished this transitional area.

Starting now with the oldest beads we have in the collection, we come to the Indus Valley Civilization era. This first bead is an ‘etched agate’ approximately 4 cm in length. As mentioned before, this civilization most likely started thousands of years before in the foothills, and moved down into the Indus Valley as agriculture and city-states became larger and more centralized. In the first two photographs above, we have a design we have never seen in print before, which came scattered among other beads from the same time period. There are lots of beads with flower designs and some early “Earth Door-Sky Door” beads of etched agate. The main differences we can see with these earlier beads is the alkali was not as thickly applied (much like the etched carnelians of the Iran and Indus areas – sometimes only three distinct layers, weathering away naturally), and the age indicators are even more highly defined. While much of the manganese deposits are similar to the later beads, this can be explained simply as some areas had more natural manganese than others (similar to uranium, or any other mineral). In the last photograph above, we are looking into the drilled hole of the bead, and still find bits of manganese adhering to the old, degraded tooling marks left from the original drilling, approximately 3,500 years ago. In the next two sets of photographs, we will be looking at an indicator of extreme age that can not be faked, which we have found on selected items from China, the Americas and from the Indus Valley (and presumably, under the right conditions, could happen anywhere). Another great indicator of true age shown in the first two photographs above would be the manganese dendrites starting to grow into the white alkaline areas of the bead. This will be explained further with the last two massive topaz beads we will be presenting in this first article on authenticating and dating beads.

In the two above photographs (taken at 10X and 20X microscopic power respectively), we find an anomaly which we consider to be one of the rarest authenticating indicators that we look for on extremely old artifacts. What is being shown in the two photos above, and three photographs to follow, are petrified tree roots, in what we would consider their final stage, before they also start to wear and degrade away. This type of petrification only occurs under certain conditions of burial; what we find much more often is the tree root tracks (as shown above) where the root has eaten at the stone, died, and degraded away. We plan another article soon here on Timeless Artifact showing this process from the beginning stages, through the first mineralization stage, to what we see above in a fully petrified root that has actually exchanged ions with the mother material and become the material it once was growing upon. This process can be also be seen in the Ang Estate Collection – Shang Period Sardine Can Opener Man article, on a more-than-3,000-year-old nephrite jade figure on our Timeless Jade web site. This petrification process, even to the mineralization stage, we have never seen on anything buried in earth under 2,000 years old. We have seen it occur on shipwreck items from approximately 700 years, but those are much different conditions, and are more mineralized, with none of them (so far) reaching the stage of full petrification we see above.

In the three photographs above, we are looking at the opposite side of the bead shown in the previous two photos, at fully petrified tree roots which extend to both sides of a degraded crack; the white degradation is spreading into each side of the crack in the agate, another true indicator of age. With these types of petrified roots, we find the mass of the original root to have decreased in size, as would be expected of any plant material, while the ion exchange has been occurring. This type of fully agatized tree roots always stick up above the surface of the original stone, or pottery, on which they occur. While common thinking on such petrification is that it takes millions of years to occur, this is simply not the case, and actually starts to occur rather rapidly (under the right conditions), as can be seen in studies of the early detection of mineral exchange going on now in the Mount St. Helens, Washington State, USA volcanic eruption area, which most recently erupted only thirty years ago, in 1980. On an atomic and molecular level, the exchange actually starts fairly quickly, and it can certainly happen to something as small as a tree or grass root in the approximate 2,000 year old range. Also, in the above three photos, we can see the small, dark spots of manganese growth on top of the petrified roots, and in the first photo above, the manganese dendrites starting to penetrate and grow into the surface of the white, fired-on alkali. Again, none of the surfaces of any of the beads presented in this article show any signs, under even higher magnification, of any re-cutting or re-polishing efforts, and it is inconceivable to suggest that anyone has the tooling expertise to ‘manufacture’ such an effect as seen above.

We will end this article showing two of the massive Topaz beads which belong to a set we acquired at the same time as all the other beads shown here. In the two photographs above, we are looking at the most degraded of the two beads shown in the first photos of this article, the one to the viewer’s right. Measuring approximately 11 cm in length, 4-1/2 cm in width and 2-1/2 cm in depth, it is one of over twenty beads in what believe is a matching set. There are another five or six massive topaz beads we acquired along with these that do not quite match this particular set in color and similar degradation. These other beads and the rest of this set are still under investigation, as only five beads have undergone the cleaning process described above. At first, we thought these beads to be drilled completely through and remnants of original string observed inside. We resisted the cleaning of these beads for years because they were so “in-situ” in appearance. It was decided that for this article, we would subject some of the beads to the exacting cleaning process we used on all the beads shown here. What we have found after the cleaning is that they are truly in an almost pure “in-situ” condition, as all deposits, degradation and wear are natural; what we did not expect to find, after shooting out the holes with our high pressure water sprayer, was that they were never drilled all the way through. Only the ends of all the beads were drilled, and all to the depth of approximately 1-1/2 cm. We can only surmise as to why this occurred, but it was likely due to the hardness of the topaz, the length of the beads themselves, and because they were not strung, but rather, were pinned with a metallic substance and fashioned into an extremely large necklace using ornate metal, which was either not recovered with the beads, or was removed by the original finders of these magnificent specimens. In the last photo of this article, we will show that it was most likely the latter of the two reasons why the accompanying metal was not passed on with the beads.

All three of the above photographs were taken at 30X microscopic power. The first two show portions of the outside of the first, large bead above, and the last photo is of the worn tooling marks and degradation to the inside edge of one side of a drilled hole. In both of the top two photos, we can easily see the depth of the pitting from natural degradation, soil penetration into the topaz after long term burial, and the manganese deposits that have grown inside of some of the depression areas. What needs to be explained here is that the red coloring to the topaz bead appears to be some sort of an applied iron oxide, just as the white alkali was applied and fired on. It is our opinion that they chose these magnificent topaz beads for their “power”, but still wanted to have the etched agate look to them. On the white alkali ‘Eyes’ (some of these beads have as many as 30 Eyes on them), we can detect three distinct coatings of the alkali, and whether they were fired on at separate times, or all at once, we do not know. The layering of the oxides to color the stone red was performed in the same manner in successive layers. In the last photograph above, the ancient tooling marks in the bead show exactly the type of degradation we would expect to see, both to the pitting and rounding of the drilling marks and the whitish degradation appearing on the outside of the tooling grooves. Bits of original soil and detritus can also be seen in this last photo, clinging to the degradation even after undergoing such a powerful water spraying and prior cleaning.

With these above three ‘full’ photographs of the last bead in this article, we find that one of two beads in this set shows several anomalies, and yet the fact that they belong to the set of over twenty is not in question. The anomalies stem more from the fact that topaz, like nephrite jade, jadeites and all stone, are not as homogenous as thought when examining specimens of differing origins. Not all stones are absolutely pure in all areas of the specimen, as can easily be understood and demonstrated with diamonds. That is why there is a grading system, and even different parts of the same stone, or gem, differ. This particular bead above shows different aspects to it, yet still comes from the same set, in our studied opinion. In this first photograph above, we see very similar characteristics to the bead shown in the previous set of photos above; the same coloring, much of the same degradation and the same type of natural soil penetration from long term burial. However, at the bottom of the stone we see, under microscopic conditions, what appear to be extremely deep (for this type of material) tree root penetration tracks. While this bead alone could make for an entire article here on Timeless Artifact, we only have a limited amount of space and time (this time) to show some of the features of this bead. In the second photograph above, we see that most of the bead surface has been altered by some condition of burial, in that almost the entire side of the bead has a yellowish tint to it, and has degraded in a different manner than the top, and the opposite side of the bead. Perhaps this was caused from corrosive, decomposing body fluids, or perhaps the yellowing and darkened area in the middle were the effect of excessive heat, such as could be created by a pre-internment ritual burning. The fact is, we do not know the exact cause, and more research is most assuredly needed on these beads. In this article, we can only generalize, but when viewed in the third photo above, the effect can be clearly discerned. In the following microscopic photographs, we can again only go into a portion of this exquisite, specimen bead, and as our intention in this article is only to show true age identifiers, we will have to focus on certain areas more than others. As always, we would invite any qualified scholar (by appointment only) to view any item in our collection, or any collection we represent.

In these final three photographs (taken at 30X microscopic power), we will be showing three entirely different types of extreme age identifiers, which have been touched on previously in this article, with a few more bits of additional explanation. In the first photo above, we find evidence on this last bead of archaic tooling marks found on certain portions on the outside surface. These  rounded and degraded tooling marks, left from when the bead was first formed, have been found on a few portions of this set of topaz beads. In particular, they have been found on areas that test to the highest levels of topaz on a Presidium Gem Tester (even under the degraded condition of the beads). They appear to be the hardest and most dense areas of the beads, which we see under microscopic conditions. Whatever some lab testers may say about the ‘Presidium’, we have personally worn out five of these machines and are now working on our sixth. If used properly, and with literally millions of probes on differing materials, we have found the machine to be a fabulous guide in determining certain stones. While anomalies exist with this machine (as with all calibrated testing equipment), it can be used on most common gem stones with a high degree of accuracy, in our opinion. So much so, we have yet to be seriously challenged by any ‘high’ laboratory – and again, it is described as a ‘guide’. Any qualified expert wishing to test this set of beads is more than welcome to have a test sample at their expense. As these are the only tooling marks found on the outside of either the agate beads or the topaz beads, and under microscopic examination the structure appears extremely dense in this area, and given the fact that these areas seem to have taken on less degradation than other parts, all this would collectively indicate to us that these areas are indeed a bit ‘tougher’, which should be expected, as stones are not all homogenous.

In the second photograph above, we find a very clear area of manganese dendritic growth occurring inside a natural fissure in the topaz, and down into the minuscule cracks and pores of the topaz bead. While there are all kinds of stones with manganese dendrites to be found, all over the world, these ones are occurring only on the surface portions of an ancient polished bead. We have nephrite jade examples from Wyoming, USA that have dendrites going through 5″ of jade ‘rough’, but these have grown over periods of millions of years as the stone worked its way up to the surface from approximately 30 miles below, and then have weathered there for an extreme amount of time. This is not what we find on this bead and the other Indus Valley timeframe bead above. Here, we are seeing manganese dendritic growth on the surface only, and not inside the interior of the stones. This is a true indicator of artifact age and not just the stone’s age.

In the last photograph above, we are looking into the the drill hole of this bead, and as with the similar bead above, we can see the ancient weathered, degraded drill tooling marks and the degradation to the topaz in the whitened area on top of the tooling marks. Dark manganese deposits can be seen as well going deeper into the drilling hole, that most likely held the metallic pins for a superb necklace of archaic origin. On the outside edge of the drilling hole we have found on this bead only (so far), the remnants of what could have been the metal used for the pins and perhaps the entire necklace — gold. While only a portion of this set of beads has been cleaned to date, what we originally thought to be the remnants of string are, under closer examination, more like a waxy or resinous coating to the inner walls of the beads, which has picked up some fibers over time. More of these beads will be cleaned in the future, and we may leave some of them as they are now to show the contrast. Obviously, we hope to find more gold around and inside other drill holes, as well.

Again in closing, we will never know all there is to know about all of the beads shown in this first bead article, mainly because they were not received directly from a controlled archeological dig, but at least they can still be studied under controlled circumstances, and they are not completely broken up, nor hiding in a warehouse, or out traveling through uncontrolled hands at present.

All full bead photographs were taken with Canon EOS XSi using Canon’s Ef 24-70mm f/2.8L Lens

All high magnification photographs were taken with Canon EOS XSi under microscopic power.

David Fredericks — Yulongwei

Timeless Jade

Timeless Artifact