Photos

Comments

• 

  Betty May 22, 2015 at 10:29am

  Wow, this is a spectactular piece, Lynn. I must confess that I have a major weakness for enamel work.

  I have never seen this kind of enamel in Bulgarian work, though... very interesting!

  It looks a bit like a cross of Russian 19th century enamelling (though the colours differ) and Ottoman filigree. The  dangles, could well be fertility symbols, like a bowl or womb, but maybe Peter can tell us more. Congrats!
• 

  Peter Hoesli May 22, 2015 at 2:45pm

  Dear Lynn; A truly nice piece indeed. I love the color combination but same as Betty, I have never seen this kind of work in Bulgarian jewelry, despite having some enameled jewelry from Bulgaria in my collection. Very beautiful indeed. With kind regards. Peter 
• 

  Lynn Ardent May 22, 2015 at 3:31pm

  Thank you Betty and Peter!  This came out of Bulgaria, but it is always possible it is from elsewhere originally.  I welcome other thoughts on its origin.  The chubby moon-shapes do appear consistently in Bulgarian jewels. 
  
• 

  Mustafa J. Salem May 22, 2015 at 3:37pm

  This is beautiful Lynn. The filigree and the enamel are just beautiful. Like the colour combination.

  Thanks for posting this to share with us. Best regards Mustafa
• 

  Joost Daalder May 22, 2015 at 11:23pm

  I can't add anything authoritative to the comments already made, but I have no doubt at all about the quality and appeal of the piece. It is very beautiful indeed and I entirely understand why you bought it. And I do agree that the chubby moon-shapes occur in Bulgarian jewels, but otherwise cannot "place" the piece. It has a c. 1900 feel to me. Could it be that it is Bulgarian but part of a late-ish, more "international" development? It's a great success aesthetically in any case.
• 

  Alaa eddine SAGID May 22, 2015 at 11:57pm

  This is definetely Bulgarian/Macedonian: i have a similar one enameled and gilt on a chain though in much more humble color tones!

  indeed yours is stunning in the freshness and the shine of the coulours! I believe it to be much later than what you are suggesting for i have often noticed in Bulgarian pieces than older pieces do often come with "champlevé" enamel rather than filgreed enameling which is the case here. Actually It seems that "champlevé" enamel is always a sign of a very good age in the jewelry i came by and studied.

  But my remark does not rule out the filgreed enamel being used in very early pieces as well....your pendant could have been a bit overcleaned to showcase such vivid shine?

  Also older pieces would have a couple of couloured glass cabs enchrined in a multi claw fitting (very carchteristic)

  These pendants would have been part of a larger pectoral or necklace i think, about three chains each supporting one of these pendants in the middle and the three chain would be joined by each extremity and pinned on each shoulder, the pendants would fall one below the other on the chest or upper belly(?)....as shown on this picture, posted earlier by Patricia DEANY

  
• 

  Joost Daalder May 23, 2015 at 4:59am

  Well done, Alaa! I mentioned a "late-ish" development because as you say the enamelling is not typical of earlier pieces. Hence I picked 1900. But, although in theory it might be, as you say, earlier, your predominant inclination to place it later seems to me actually more plausible - perhaps 1930 or so? That does not in any sense diminish the inherent, excellent quality of the piece, if correct. Anywhere between 1900-1930 would seem very plausible to me, though I may be wrong. I am sure Lynn will be very grateful for your well-informed comment.
• 

  Joost Daalder May 23, 2015 at 6:00pm

  Thinking further about this, I feel that Alaa's distinction between the two kinds of enamelling is indeed crucial to the matter of dating, but I am not myself bothered by the freshness of the colours as indicating a late-ish date simply because they look fresh OR because the areas may have been cleaned. I have often seen pieces with very fresh enamels which were much older than one would initially think  because the pieces had been hardly worn and well preserved, so that even a century or so later they still looked entirely "like new". This has also typically happened even with pigmented tribal artefacts: some that have been kept in museums and well covered have retained very much the colours that the pigments had originally. Nevertheless, I agree with Alaa that this piece does not seem particularly early, but I feel that that is due to the way it was made rather than any other factor. I fully agree with him that characteristic 19th c pieces tend to show champlevé enamelling, and I think it is because of that factor that several people here felt that this piece did not look like what they expected of a Bulgarian piece.
• 

  Joost Daalder May 23, 2015 at 7:46pm

  I posted this on Facebook, where many have clicked "like" and it is much admired. One of the commentators is Frankie Carter, also very well known here on "ethnic jewels", and now living in Bulgaria. She also likes the piece very much indeed, but does not think it is "that old". However, she nearly bough it herself! It seems there is something like a consensus emerging, I feel.
• 

  Joost Daalder May 23, 2015 at 7:46pm

  I do think it is very, very beautiful, whatever the precise age ...