2013-01-05 17.08.59

I have written about these types of constructions a number of times, online. They are very beautiful, well-made, and sometimes (or often) include old elements from Tibet and Ladakh. But they are not "Tibetan," and would best be thought of as "Ladakh-inpsired." They are not traditional ornaments, but rather are recent constructions that sometimes use old beads and elements. Frankly, I suspect they are made in factories or small cottage industries (perhaps in India). The ladies in Ladakh do not (or formerly did not) wear necklaces such as this. As near as I can tell, the basis of this work derives from head-coverings (such as the traditional PERAK). These necklaces have now been around for about twenty years--and I have been engaged in discussing them, accurately, ever since then.

In many, many instances, jewelry is available to us that is essentially misrepresented. A "Tibetan necklace" sounds as though it were something made and worn in Tibet. But, in fact, it would be more accurate to say the piece is "a necklace of Tibetan elements." I myself have made quite a few such necklaces--and I would be glad to show them (if anyone is interested--since I have recently formatted several images). I am a working artist, and also a bead historian. I am very careful to distinguish between original pieces, restrung original pieces, and new pieces made from old (or new) elements. I do not make "Tibetan necklaces"--because I am not a Tibetan, and do not live or work in Tibet. But I make great stuff USING Tibetan elements. I would never call these pieces "Tibetan."

Returning to the topic, I would be happy to show several examples of this lunate collar and bib work, nearly always said to be "antigue" and implied to be authentic tribal or ethnic pieces. Sometimes they are huge constructions, and often they are entirely or nearly entirely composed from new beads (including dyed coral or fake coral, and new Chinese turquoise). And they may have old silver ornaments, but often include tiny commercial ball-chains (such as we see in the present specimen).

Recently, I have seen (on the Net) a VERY SIMILAR lunate collar, composed from oche-yellow glass beads, and with brass elements from tribal Eastern India (or Burma). This is being misrepresented as a "Naga" piece--for which it is not remotely any such thing. Because of how it is made, I am confident it comes from the same manufacturers as the "Ladakh" pieces. But it's just another fake made for the fake antiquities market, that has no basis in traditional ornaments.

I am sorry to be a "crepe-hanger" or "killjoy" here. As a consumer advocate, I work hard to expose misrepresentation--and, hopefully, to broaden the perspective people have and may promote, when mistaken identifications are suggested. "The truth is out there." We can know it. Jamey

Comments

howah January 5, 2013 at 9:06pm

I am sure these look very nice on you!
Marie-Ange January 5, 2013 at 9:45pm

haha, yes I like to think so!!
Marie-Ange January 5, 2013 at 10:16pm

hahahahaha......................................!!!
Marie-Ange January 5, 2013 at 10:26pm

Thanks Sarah x
Akkie January 6, 2013 at 12:06pm

Superb and good to wear. Ga je het ook doen?
Liuba Berti - AMAZIGH January 6, 2013 at 1:35pm

Beautiful piece and great photo
Marie-Ange January 6, 2013 at 1:46pm

@Akkie yes I wear them!!
Thelma January 7, 2013 at 10:01am

These are gorgeous Marie-Ange. They look quite old. Did they also come from the Amsterdam Tribal Fair?
Marie-Ange January 7, 2013 at 12:53pm

Hi Thelma, yes the bottom one comes from the Masterdam Tribal fair, the top one I had for many years already.
Jamey D. Allen April 15, 2014 at 10:05pm

I have written about these types of constructions a number of times, online. They are very beautiful, well-made, and sometimes (or often) include old elements from Tibet and Ladakh. But they are not "Tibetan," and would best be thought of as "Ladakh-inpsired." They are not traditional ornaments, but rather are recent constructions that sometimes use old beads and elements. Frankly, I suspect they are made in factories or small cottage industries (perhaps in India). The ladies in Ladakh do not (or formerly did not) wear necklaces such as this. As near as I can tell, the basis of this work derives from head-coverings (such as the traditional PERAK). These necklaces have now been around for about twenty years--and I have been engaged in discussing them, accurately, ever since then.

In many, many instances, jewelry is available to us that is essentially misrepresented. A "Tibetan necklace" sounds as though it were something made and worn in Tibet. But, in fact, it would be more accurate to say the piece is "a necklace of Tibetan elements." I myself have made quite a few such necklaces--and I would be glad to show them (if anyone is interested--since I have recently formatted several images). I am a working artist, and also a bead historian. I am very careful to distinguish between original pieces, restrung original pieces, and new pieces made from old (or new) elements. I do not make "Tibetan necklaces"--because I am not a Tibetan, and do not live or work in Tibet. But I make great stuff USING Tibetan elements. I would never call these pieces "Tibetan."

Returning to the topic, I would be happy to show several examples of this lunate collar and bib work, nearly always said to be "antigue" and implied to be authentic tribal or ethnic pieces. Sometimes they are huge constructions, and often they are entirely or nearly entirely composed from new beads (including dyed coral or fake coral, and new Chinese turquoise). And they may have old silver ornaments, but often include tiny commercial ball-chains (such as we see in the present specimen).

Recently, I have seen (on the Net) a VERY SIMILAR lunate collar, composed from oche-yellow glass beads, and with brass elements from tribal Eastern India (or Burma). This is being misrepresented as a "Naga" piece--for which it is not remotely any such thing. Because of how it is made, I am confident it comes from the same manufacturers as the "Ladakh" pieces. But it's just another fake made for the fake antiquities market, that has no basis in traditional ornaments.

I am sorry to be a "crepe-hanger" or "killjoy" here. As a consumer advocate, I work hard to expose misrepresentation--and, hopefully, to broaden the perspective people have and may promote, when mistaken identifications are suggested. "The truth is out there." We can know it. Jamey

of 3

This reply was deleted.

You need to be a member of Ethnic Jewels to add comments!

Join Ethnic Jewels

Photos

2013-01-05 17.08.59

Comments

Request your copy of our newsletter.