IN SEARCH OF THE “MISSING” VENETIAN BEADS
	A rereading of Kenneth E. Kidd’s Glass Bead-Making from the Middle Ages to the Nineteenth Century (1979) has reminded this student of one of the great mysteries of the bead world.  Now, when I say mysteries, this pertains to me and not necessarily to the leading bead researchers of the day.  The mystery of the “missing” Venetians was first presented to me some years ago by Mr. “Beadman” Allen, if I may mention names, and from time to time, Mr. Allen and I have pondered this subject of continuing mystery.  In short, it is a question of the advent of drawn bead making at Venice or, perhaps, elsewhere in Western Europe, and I am sure this same question has long interested modern bead researchers.
	A commonly held opinion is that drawn beads were first made in Venice or thereabouts in the mid- to late-15th century and that the “chevron” bead, particularly the famous seven-layer, marks this advent of drawn bead- making.  At least, this opinion is all that the historical record allows.  However, it seems unlikely that such an elaborate bead as the seven-layer could emerge “out of whole cloth”, so to speak, but it is pointed out by Mr. Allen (and I want to be careful not to misconstrue his ideas), that the seven-layer and other cane beads may have been some kind of “epiphany” in an otherwise old and established mosaic cane industry.  Thus, the Venetians had been making decorative mosaic canes (solid rods, presumably) for quite awhile, until one day, someone got the idea to make hollow tubes, sections of which could be made directly into “tube” beads.  In other words, Venetians had been making solid mosaic canes, thin sections of which were being used for decorative work, until someone made a hollow tube instead of the usual solid seven-layer rosetta or star cane, sections of which became the famous seven-layer beads.  Why this epiphany occurred only as late as the mid- to late-15th century is a mystery to me, for it seems logical that the techniques for making both solid canes and hollow tubes must have been equally well known from the earliest periods of drawn and blown glasswork at Venice.  Otherwise, it seems unlikely that the first drawn beads of an industry would be something as elaborate as the seven-layer and that there would not be any simpler layered beads, such as a simple plain tube, from which more elaborate tubes evolved.  Sadly, the physical record provides little tangible evidence of Venetian drawn beads prior to the seven- layer, and the historical literature is equally silent.
	Dr. Kidd (pp. 61-68) has done an admirable job compiling a historical timeline for European glass bead making.   Presented below are selected excerpts from this timeline relevant to the purported “missing” Venetians period.
	1200-1300        Beadmaking begins its upsurge at Venice. 1268                Beads and glass vessels are said to have been made at Murano by Martin da Canale. 1279                German peddlers restricted to carrying from Venice ten lire’s worth of glass rods for making beads. 1295                Polo returns to Venice and encourages bead trade to the East. 1296                Beads first used in embroidery; early colors were red, white, and green. 1317                Giovanni, the “fioler”, made great improvements in colored glass; probably invented star beads.
	The 13th century, according to Kidd, witnessed an “upsurge” in bead making at Venice.  By the second half of the century, “beads” and glass vessels were being produced, although the technical variety of these beads is not specified.  However, produced along with these beads are vessels, which imply a blowpipe, suggesting rather pointedly that these bead makers had the technology to draw tubes for beads.  About this time, German peddlers were restricted in the amount of “glass rods [solid or hollow?] for making beads” that they could carry from Venice.  Late in the century, the famed Marco Polo mentions the importance of beads in trade, or something to that effect, and “embroidery” beads, presumably small beads, are being produced in enough quantity to support beadwork.  Finally, in the early 14th century, there’s the intriguing statement identifying “Giovanni” as the author of “star” beads.
	Otherwise, Kidd indicates that “no ‘works’ on Venetian glassmaking exist prior to the middle of the 15th century”, and conveniently, or as a result of this dearth of evidence, the seven-layer is dated by most experts to late 15th century Venice.  In short, the late 15th century is the earliest provable date, but indirect evidence suggests that drawn beads were produced from the 13th century.  The “missing” Venetians are hypothetical drawn beads produced in Venice from the 13th century, as the literature and certain logic suggest, of which, the seven-layer is a late 15th century evolutionary descendant.  Thus, the quest is on for drawn beads of proven Venetian origin that are older than the late 15th century and the seven-layer.
	Certainly there must be collections of beads somewhere that contain a wide variety of candidate “missing” Venetians and, fortunately, our dating problem is greatly eased by the “discovery” of the New World coinciding with this important moment in bead history.  New World glass beads are no older than the late 15th century and older styles will usually not be found there.  Old World beads can be tentatively dated based upon the dating of New World finds.  Left out of the equation are beads produced before the Age of Exploration, which would not usually be found in the New World.  If the hypothetical “missing” Venetians exist and are to be identified, they will found in pre-Columbian Old World locations.  Based upon the quantity and variety of hard-to-explain beads that have been emerging from West Africa in recent decades and the realization that Europe traded with West Africa for centuries prior to the Age of Exploration, it seems probable that the “missing” Venetians actually exist and that they will be identified among the “Roman” beads of the modern West African trade.  At the same time, the “missing” Venetians are not likely to match New World beads, but they may likely have things in common.
	West African glass beads may now be divided into three categories: A.        Beads that match New World trade beads of known European origin; B.        Beads that can be traced to the Middle East or elsewhere other than Europe; and C.        The “missing” Venetian (or European) beads.
	The easy part of this sort is the elimination of Group A.  Otherwise, we are left with a hodgepodge of mainly small, nondescript, and poorly understood beads of shadowy provenance that comprise Groups B and C.
	The sorting of such a pile was addressed in the recent “Fourteen Strings of ‘Roman’ beads”.  Among the “Roman” glass beads, shape, size, and color were the main criteria for sorting.  Most all of these beads are drawn, and variations in the drawing and finishing techniques suggest multiple origins.  Bead techniques that can be extrapolated to New World Venetian trade beads would be the best candidates for the “missing” Venetians, while techniques not represented in the New World beads would less likely be Venetian.  Beads known to be other than Venetian can also be eliminated.  Thus, a portion of beads among the “Roman” material should represent the candidate “missing” Venetians, if only the sorting can be more refined.
	In summary, it seems logical to assume that drawn beads were made in Venice from at least the 13th century, even though there is no detailed evidence.  Conversely, it seems unlikely that some epiphany of the late 15th century yielded Venetian tube beads for the first time.  If the hypothetical “missing” Venetians exist, they will be found in pre-Columbian Old World sites and they should have technical affinities with New World Venetian trade beads.  The “missing” Venetians should look more like Venetians than associated beads of known other origins and should be found in the great pre-Columbian bead importing regions of the Old World, such as West Africa.