Yemeni Bedouin Necklace

Add a Comment

Comment by Patricia Deany on February 10, 2012 at 15:36

Hmm, that is kind of a different issue, I think -- at least it would be to me. This necklace looks secure and and the cloth part looks appropriately old -- even if it is a substitute. As a buyer, -- and this is just me, not everybody else, please understand, I would like my jewelry to be wearable ( even if I don't wear it) with no loose parts -- simply because I have bought things with loose parts before and I promptly misplace the parts.  The thing is, the dealer could just secure the loose parts and sell it and nobody will really know the difference unless he tells the buyer.-- that is as long as the loose parts are secured with appropriately aged material. A lot of what jewelry is goes on in your imagination.

Comment by Anna Garner on February 10, 2012 at 14:00

Thanks, Patti, for the advice.  I have a piece very like this one; mine has one loose and dangling silver cone on it.  I have wondered what I should do before I photograph it for listing.  I think perhaps I should simply leave it as it is?  It is not falling apart, just the looseness in some of the pieces and the one silver cone hanging on for dear life.  

Comment by Harald on February 10, 2012 at 10:14

That necklace is nicely restrung but in an "Indian" way I think. Very nice for wearing that way.

Comment by Joost Daalder on February 10, 2012 at 4:19

Note, also, that this piece to which I referred just now is in the same "family" as the one above. I agree with you, Patti, that this looks Jewish, and while it is certainly from Yemen, I too wonder why it would be Bedouin?

Comment by Joost Daalder on February 10, 2012 at 4:17

Restoration in the form of replacement should only be contemplated if the piece otherwise falls apart or looks really dreadful. This is not in that category at all. See here, however, a good restoration done - most subtly, with the right colours, etc. Ultimately, I'd rather buy that then some of the newly "creative" pieces that consist of a mixture of pieces that never belonged together in the past. But, all in all, an original jewel should in any case be preserved as much as possible in its original condition. Here is a relevant link, but it is NOT intended to suggest that THIS piece should be restored: http://ethnicjewels.ning.com/photo/dsc-0474?context=user.

Comment by Patricia Deany on February 10, 2012 at 3:43

btw, the work appears Jewish to me -- can you explain the elements within that indicate bedouin heritage?

Comment by Patricia Deany on February 10, 2012 at 3:42

This is a wonderful necklace, needs no restoration whatsoever. Most people interested in ethnic jewelry would reject it if it were restored. Are you going to sell this?

Comment by Joost Daalder on February 10, 2012 at 1:09

Harald, I agree fully. Even if someone does a really good restoration job, it is still better to have the original work, if that is at all acceptable still, as it is in this case. You NEVER can get the original back, so the loss is permanent. This is a very nice necklace indeed - extremely appealing.

Comment by Harald on February 9, 2012 at 22:20

I love your necklace!

Do not restore this necklace, it is so beautiful as it is done in the old way. You do not see them still like this. In shops they are often restrung in a wrong way.

Comment by Joost Daalder on August 7, 2011 at 8:53

Reminds one of Carla's splendidly repaired piece! - She would do a great job on this one, too, but then again, this seems very original.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page