Free Music

Radiohead started the trend when they offered their album In Rainbows on the internet last year for whatever price listeners were willing to pay + now a host of new services, with the backing of major labels, are promising to revolutionise how music is distributed by offering millions of tracks for nothing (hard to believe!) + the move into a free service is a sea change for an industry which spent years fighting through the courts with companies offering free internet downloading and sharing of songs.

Free Music @
Qtrax.com
We7.com
Imeem.com
Last.fm

Ivanka Trump Collection

Ivanka Trump has a new jewelry line + a magic mix and match of old-Hollywood glamor with new concepts, with more emphasis on diamonds, pearls and black onyx + I think it may appeal to women of all ages who enjoy beautiful jewelry.

Useful link:
www.ivankatrumpcollection.com

Sense Of Smell

Retail jeweler (s) are on the scenting bandwagon because consumers are more likely to linger in a store that smells nice + increased browsing time raises the chances that consumers may make a purchase + I think the scenting evolution may be the tip of the iceberg--a unique tool to create customer loyalty.

A few interesting facts about our sense of smell:
- People recall smells with about 65% accuracy after a year, compared to 50% for visual recall of pictures after about three months.
- A woman's sense of smell is keener than a man's.
- Your sense of smell is least acute in the morning; ability to perceive odors increases as the day wears on.
- The average human being is able to detect about 10000 different odors.
- No two people smell the same odor the same way.

Useful link:
www.senseofsmell.org

Diamonds Class Action

If you purchased a gem diamond or diamond jewelry between January 1, 1994 and March 31, 2006, you may have a claim to receive benefits in a proposed class action settlement. The case is called Sullivan v. DB Investments, Inc., Civil Action Index No.04-2819 (SRC). These lawsuits are about gem diamond pricing, and the proposed settlement is with De Beers, a miner and seller of rough gem diamonds.

To get complete information about the Class Actions and your rights + to see if you qualify to receive a cash payment, you should visit www.diamondsclassaction.com

Irma Stern

The Economist writes about Irma Stern, the grande dame of South African painting + other viewpoints @ http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/artview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10592115

Useful link:
www.irmastern.co.za

Gold Update

Gold prices will continue to rise because three South African gold miners, Gold Fields (GFI) + Harmony (HAR) + AngloGold Ashanti (ANG) have stopped production at all of their local mines due to inadequate power supplies + global gold production fell to a ten-year low + the Chinese traders are busy buying gold for the upcoming New Year, which is in the first week of February.

Useful links:
www.goldfields.co.za
www.ashantigold.com
www.harmony.co.za

World's Greenest Countries

(via Newsweek) The Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy released its first official Environmental Performance Index + the list uses a variety of metrics, including carbon and sulfur emissions + water purity and conservation practices, to calculate an overall score for each country.

Useful links:
Yale's EPI Web site
www.epa.gov

Full Table Cuts With Blunt, Missing Or Broken Corners

(via Diamond Cuts in Historic Jewelry:1381-1910) Herbert Tillander writes:

A most unusual agraffe, made in 1603 by the Augsburg master goldsmith, hans Georg Beuerl, can be seen today in the Schatzkammer der Residenz, Munich. Set with 245 diamonds, this enormous jewel weighs 410 grams (just under a pound) and is 17.5 cm high. My assistant U.-J.Petterson and I were given special permission to examine this ‘War Trophy’, as it is sometimes called. We worked at night, after the museum was closed, fully equipped with polaroid camera, wax and plaster for taking prints and making models, jeweler’s tools, etc. Our first discovery was a horrifying one—several of the diamonds were missing! We stayed in the museum all night in order to prove in the morning that we had not removed them. It is astonishing to think that the absence of these stones had not previously been noticed.

The description given here is based on our study of this magnificent jewel, which represents a trophy of weapons with cuirass and helmet, set all over with diamonds. In addition, six pearls adorn the upper part. The composition is dominated by large Table Cuts of exceptionally fine make, but also contains a whole collection of different contemporary cuts, all beautifully fashioned: Star Cuts, Trihedrally Faceted Lozenges, Kites, Triangles and, last but not least, small Table Cuts which closely resemble similar modern cuts. One of the Baguettes, though only 2mm wide, is a full 12mm long. The largest of the Tables is nearly 16mm square—the same size as the famous diamond in the The Three Brethren, said in its time to be the largest diamond in Christendom. According to Lord Twining, the diamond on the trophy weighs 18ct. As a matter of interest, the diamond in the The Three Brethren, though of the same dimensions, weighed 30ct because it was a Pyramidal Point Cut whereas that in the agraffe is a Table.

The cross, worn by Marie de Medici in a portrait painted between 1612 and 1614 by Frans Pourbus the Younger (Musée du Louvre, Paris), was never documented in an inventory but, according to Bapst, besides being depicted on Marie de Medici’s coronation robe in this portrait, it also appeared in a portrait of Anne of Austria. It is quite possible that the jewel included the five Table Cut diamonds of the Great Cross owned by Francis I. The cross was apparently broken up after Anne’s death, since it is not listed in the Crown inventory of 1691. The diamonds were set in the new style, close to each other in barely visible box settings. The four triangular mirror-cut diamonds at the extremities of the cross emphasize the very regular arrangement of the square gems. The three large drop-shaped pearls appear to be of exceptional quality and add to the magnificence of the jewel.

The beautifully enamelled portable set of gold flatware (from a Renaissance cutlery set, 17.3 cm long—Grϋnes Gewölbe, Dresden) is thought to have been made in Nuremberg in about 1600. In 1724 it was given as a birthday present to King Augustus I of Poland, Elector of Saxony, by the wife of Crown Marshall Mnisczek of Warsaw. Originally there was a toothpick inserted in the handle, with the image of a kneeling princess as its knob. The spoon shown is decorated with High Table Cuts and similarly fashioned rubies.

Full Table Cuts With Blunt, Missing Or Broken Corners (continued)

Jewelers Of The Middle Ages

(via 5000 Years of Gems and Jewelry) Frances Rogers and Alice Beard writes:

1. The Goldsmith-Monk

The introduction of Christianity gave a fresh impetus and spread new fields for arts. There were churches to be built and decorated. A demand arose for architects, sculptors, painters, embroiderers, glassmen, woodcarvers, goldsmiths and a host of other skilled artists and craftsmen to create a building worthy to be called the House of God. It seems fitting that the men with the widest knowledge of the work required should be the artist-monks. Many of them were traveling missionaries.

In the eleventh century there lived one of these monks known as Theophilus, who not only traveled far and wide, but thoughtfully jotted down in his notebook whatever he found of interest concerning the arts of different countries. His manuscripts, preserved in numerous ancient copies, have become invaluable as a faithful record of the methods of work employed by craftsmen who lived nine hundred years ago.

Theophilus, in his preface, charges the reader to ‘covet with greedy looks this (his) Book of Various Arts, read it thoroughly with a tenacious memory, embrace it with ardent love,’ and:

Should you carefully peruse this, you will find out whatever Greece possesses in kinds and mixtures of various colors, whatever Tuscany knows on in mosaic work, or in variety of enamel; whatever Arabia shows forth in work of fusion, ductility, or chasing; whatever Italy ornaments with gold, in diversity of vases and sculpture of gems or ivory; whatever France loves in a costly variety of windows; whatever industrious Germany approves in work of gold, silver, copper and iron, of woods and of stones.

Then follows a detailed description of the goldsmith’s workshop, his bellows, anvil, hammers and other tools, which include ‘an instrument through which wires are drawn.’

Like the jewelers of the Pharaohs, the jeweler of medieval times was expected to be goldsmith, designer, sculptor, smelter, enameler inlay-worker, and an expert in the cutting and mounting of gemstones. As you read Theophilus you are impressed anew with the versatility of the jewelry-maker of past ages.

It must be admitted, however, that although the ancient goldsmiths achieved results and the good Theophilus tells how they did it, yet their practices were at times fraught with certain customs which smack of something akin to quackery. Not that they did not themselves profoundly believe in the efficacy of such practices. They did. But a certain amount of hocus-pocus was inevitably mixed with all the learning of that day. When the twentieth century becomes ‘ancient times’ will anything like that be said of our science and learning?

We are allowed a glimpse of Theophilus’ innocent necromancy, when swelling with pride he discloses a trade secret:

Who should desire to cut with iron the rare stones—which the rulers of Rome, who formerly sustained the noble arts, much delighted in, upon gold, let him know the invention, which I with profound thought have discovered, which is very precious. I procure urinam with the fresh blood of a lusty goat, fed for a short time upon ivy, which being done, I cut the gems in the warm blood, as the author Pliny has pointed out, who wrote upon the arts, which the Roman people put to proof, and who likewise well described the virtue of stones; he who knows the powers of which favors them the more.

Concerning rock crystal, Theophilus advises the lapidary:
But should you wish to sculp crystal, take a goat of two or three years and, binding his feet, cut an opening between his breast and stomach in the position of the heart, and lay in the crystal, so that it may lie in its blood until it grows warm. Taking it out directly, cut what you please in it as long as the heat lasts, and when it has begun to grow cold and to harden, replace it again in the blood of goat....

And so on until you have completed the work of art and are ready to polish it ‘with a linen cloth’. Needless to say, there was no S.P.C.A in those days.

During the Middle Ages, although the glyptic art was saved from entire extinction—largely by the monk-craftsman—still it sank so far into oblivion that generally speaking it is said to have been lost. Indeed, so little was the art understood, that some men, even men of intelligence, supposed the engraving on an ancient gem to be the work of nature—like the pattern on a butterfly’s wing.

Many pages of Theophilus’ manuscript are given over to recipes for making glass gems and colorful enamels. He even tells how to make ornamental finger rings of colored glass, set with glass gems.

Naturally whatever art a monk practised he used for the glory of his church. Therefore the goldsmith lavished his most elaborate art on ecclesiastical jewels. But he also worked for private patrons. Both the craftsman’s and the layman’s ideas of beauty were strongly influenced by the sumptuous objects designed for religious purposes.

The very center and focusing point of art was the Church. Paintings, statues, textiles, stained glass, and jeweled metalwork—in fact the major works of almost all the artists in Christendom—gravitated toward the Church, or were related to religious ideas.

Between the eleventh and the fifteenth centuries the link binding craftsman and church together was strenghtened by demands for the building and decoration of great cathedrals. The architect left space in the walls for picture windows of gorgeous jewel-like glass. Altars were profusely decorated, panels were painted and encrusted with gems, images occupied niches canopied by stone, carved with the delicate intricacy of lace. To the marvelous cathedral of Chartres came pilgrims by the thousands, bringing as offerings the richest of silks and embroideries, and splendid jewels with which to deck the images of saints or the vestments of priests, or to be set as ornament on any object used in the ritual of worship.

Certain patterns and styles of design employed for the decoration of churches were mirrored in the things of everyday life. Even the costumes of the period reflected the Gothic art. The head-dresses of women resembled architectural structures; the patterns on their gowns imitated those on stained-glass windows; and as for the jewelry, that more than anything else fell under the prevailing influence. Even the images of saints, stone canopies and all, were wrought in miniatures of gold and worn as brooches or pendants.

Jewelers Of The Middle Ages (continue)

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture

(via The Outline of Art) William Orpen writes:

2

The third great English portrait-painter of the eighteenth century was George Romney, who never exhibited at the Royal Academy, and all his life was hostile to that institution and to its president, Sir Joshua Reynolds. Romney was born at Dalton-in-Furness, Lancashire, in 1734, when Reynolds was a boy of eleven and Gainsborough a child of seven. He was one of eleven children, and his father was a man of many occupations—farmer, builder, cabinet-maker, and dealer—and little prosperous in anything he undertook. George Romney consequently had his education neglected: at eleven years old he was helping his father in the workshop, and there he displayed precocious ability in drawing portraits of the workmen and other people. When he was twenty he made acquaintance of a vagabond artist named Christopher Steele, who journeyed from place to place making portraits, and in 1755 this man secured Romney as his pupil and took him with him on his travels. In the following year Romney fell ill with a fever and was tenderly nursed by his landlady’s daughter, a domestic servant named Mary Abbott, and being a highly-strung romantic youth Romney married this girl in the first burst of his gratitude, and later found her utterly unsuited to be his mate. Steele meanwhile had settled at York and summoned Romney to join him there as soon as he was well enough, and since he was not earning enough to keep a wife Mrs Romney had to go back to service when her husband rejoined the man to whom he was apprenticed.

There was little good that Steele, a mediocre artist and a loose liver, could teach Romney, and their association was more profitable to the older than the younger man, and after a year or two in bondage at York, Romney managed to purchase his freedom, and he then made a home for his wife at Kendal. With this town as his headquarters, he rambled about the Lake Country painting heads at £2 2s. each and small full lengths at £6 6s., till in 1762 he had at last managed to save a hundred pounds.

Romney was now twenty eight, and he felt that if ever he was to make his fortune by his art he must seek it in London. So giving £70 to his wife, with the remaining £30 he came to the capital, where he at once competed for a prize offered by the Society of Arts for an historical picture on ‘The Death of Wolfe.’ Romney was at first awarded a prize of fifty guineas for his version of this theme, but later the judges reversed their verdict and awarded the fifty guineas to John Hamilton Mortimer (1741-79), a young friend of Richard Wilson and Reynolds, and gave Romney only a consolation prize of twenty five guineas. Romney, not unnaturally, believed this reversal of the first judgment to be the result of favoritism, and to to the end of his life he thought that it had been brought about by Reynolds, who had been actuated by fear of a rival. In 1766 Romney again gained a premium for his ‘Death of King Edward’ from the Society of Arts, to which he was now admitted a member, and henceforward he exhibited regularly at the Society’s exhibitions, but always held aloof from the Academy. In 1767 he paid a visit to his wife and two daughters at Kendal, and returning alone to London soon established himself in public favor, and in the early ‘seventies he was making over a thousand a year by his profession. He thought the time had now come when he should visit Italy, and in March 1773 he set off for that country in the company of a brother artist, Ozias Humphrey (1742-1810), who afterwards became a famous miniature-painter. At Rome, Romney separated himself from his fellow traveler and led a hermit’s life, shunning the society of his compatriots, and giving his whole time to work and study. In 1775 he made his way back to England via Venice and Parma, studying with advantage the work of Correggio in the latter city, and reaching London in the month of July. Greatly improved now in his coloring and confident in his increased knowledge and power, Romney boldly took the house and studio of Francis Cotes, R.A (1725-70), who had been one of the chief of the older portrait-painters, at 32 Cavendish Square, and there seriously entered into competition with Reynolds. Gainsborough, it will be remembered, did not come to London till 1779, so that Romney, though the younger man, was the first formidable rival that Reynolds had to endure. Charging £15 15s. for head life-size, Romney soon found himself surrounded by sitters, and Reynolds was alarmed at the way in which his practice for a time was diminished by the painter to whom he contemptuously referred as ‘the man in Cavendish Square’. Later Romney had so many commissions that he was able to put up his prices, but even so he received only about 80 guineas for the full-length portraits which now fetch many thousands of pounds when they are sold by auction at Christie’s. When Reynolds died he left a fortune of £80000 earned by his brush, and though Romney was not successful to this extent he made a good living, his income in the year 1785 being £3635.

But Romney was never a mere money-grubber, and when at the age of forty-eight he first met his most famous sitter, the dazzlingly beautiful Emma Lyon, known to history as Lady Hamilton, he was so fascinated by her extraordinary personality, that time after time he refused all kinds of wealthy sitters in order that he might continue uninterruptedly to paint the lovely Emma. In 1882 the future Lady Hamilton was a mere girl of twenty or twenty one, living under the protection of Charles Grevile, who four years later—when he was in money difficulties—heartlessly handed her over to his uncle, Sir William Hamilton, who treated her more kindly and honorably. For five years Romney painted this fascinating creature continually in a variety of characters, and though gossip soon busied itself making scandal out of their relations, there is no evidence that the painter’s affection for her was anything but platonic. Of his many paintings of her, one of the most charming, the ‘Lady Hamilton’ is in the National Portrait Gallery.

In the art of George Romney there is a peculiar feminine quality which gives an extraordinary winsomeness, almost a pathos, to his paintings of frail women. There is a paternal tenderness rather than the passion of a lover in his paintings of Emma Hamilton and of another famous beauty, Mrs Robinson, known as ‘Perdita’. Romney’s beautiful portrait of the last in the Wallace Collection was done while this gifted actress was under the protection of the Prince of Wales, afterwards George IV. But that royal rascal soon tired of her, and at the age of twenty four she had already been abandoned by ‘the first gentleman in Europe’. When he sent her away the Prince gave her a bond for £20000; but he never paid it, and ‘Perdita’ Robinson died in 1800, poor and paralysed.

Nobody has yet discovered who was the original of Romney’s most famous masterpiece, ‘The Parson’s Daughter’, but we may imagine that his beautiful creature, with a gentle melancholy behind her smile, was also one of the frail sisterhood to which both Lady Hamilton and Mrs Robinson belonged. The extraordinary sweetness and simplicity of Romney’s portraiture of women has the same tender reverence for the sex that we find in ‘The Vicar of Wakefield,’ and the peculiar winningness of Romney is perhaps best described by placing him as the Goldsmith of English painting.

Though he never brought his wife and family to London—where it is probable that they would have felt ill at ease in a sphere to which they were not accustomed—Romney supported them in comfort, and when after years of hard work in London his health broke down, he went back to his wife at Kendal. She received him without reproaches, and under her affectionate care the tired, worn-out genius ‘sank gently into second childhood and the grave’. He died at Kendal on November 15, 1802.

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture (continue)

Heard On The Street

Many gemstone/jewelry/art buyer (s) don't have the expertise needed to determine what something is worth + it makes sense to turn to professionals for advice + information from someone knowl­edgeable in the industry can level the information playing field.

The Facebook Facescape

I found the CNN Money.com article on the Facebook Economy (the social networking site) interesting + the article's authors provides some insights on the operating system (s) + other viewpoints on opportunities for new business models.

The Reasons Why People Like Synthetic Gemstones

I think lab-grown gemstone industry is evolving + it hasn’t impacted the natural colored gemstone and diamond market + many believe its threat has been greatly exaggerated + most synthetic gem materials are detectable via standard / advanced gemological tests + they are affordable + some people love technology, so like the product + consumers tend to like the stones if they are properly disclosed with less technical jargons + they are popular in fashion pieces + some buy it for themselves.

Peter Doig

Peter Doig is a Scottish painter + he's one of Europe's most expensive living painters + his pictures are landscapes + he uses unusual colour combinations + depicts scenes from unexpected angles giving his work a magic realist feel + I like it because they simulate inclusion-landscapes in gemstones + they are beautiful.

Useful links:
http://www.saatchi-gallery.co.uk/artists/peter_doig.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Doig
www.michaelwerner.com
www.victoria-miro.com

Bottle Shock

The film, Bottle Shock, by director Randall Miller revisits a 1976 blind tasting in which French experts hailed California wines over some of France's finest vintages + the movie was shown at the Sundance film festival this week + expect more fireworks from the French wine sector.

Useful links:
www.sundance.org
www.bottleshockthemovie.com
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0914797

Smart Money Decisions

In a great book Smart Money Decisions by Max H. Bazerman, there are some insights on why some people lose at auctions + the examples deal with important decision problems everyone of us is confronted with at least once in her/his lifetime + I think gem dealers, jewelers, and art dealers should read it because it contains wealth of insights.

Here is what the description of Smart Money Decisions has to say (via Amazon):
When it comes to money matters, even the smartest of us can make some pretty dumb decisions. From falling in love at first sight with a house and hastily negotiating a price to blindly following the pack in investment dealings, life is fraught with financial choices that are settled on with gut instinct rather than a level head—moves that can, and often do, lead to costly mistakes. In order to sidestep major money blunders, resisting first impulses, though not easy to do, is absolutely crucial. This groundbreaking book gives you the tools necessary to think through fiscal issues practically so you don't continue making decisions rashly.

Written by Max Bazerman, a renowned expert in the field of decision making and negotiation, Smart Money Decisions illustrates both how and why we make the decisions we do. Offering an intriguing mental audit of people's psychological relationship with money, it provides the essential understanding you need to identify your own approach to finances, recognize any inherent problems, and determine ways to overcome them.

Bazerman guides you through these basic steps with the goal of permanently improving your financial decisions in a wide range of real-life scenarios, such as buying and selling a home or a car, making investments, and choosing careers. Highlighting the errors too often made in these and other situations, Smart Money Decisions presents the 10 most important money mistakes, including:

- Overconfidence—the engine that fuels other monetary missteps
- Being unprepared —'winging it' leads to mishaps that could easily be avoided
- Focusing on beating the other side—coming out on top shouldn't overshadow making a decision that will help you in the long run
- Ignoring alternatives—having your heart set on only one option isn't always the wisest strategy

Packed with sound advice and expert recommendations on how to make more reasoned monetary decisions, Smart Money Decisions is essential reading for anyone who wants to stop making costly financial errors.

Seeing Snowflakes

This is what I found interesting from Ken Libbrecht's website @ SnowCrystals.com + Ken Libbrecht is the chairman of the physics department @ the California Institute of Technology + he studies the physics of snow crystals.

Here is what he has to say about snowflakes:
A snow crystal forms up in the atmosphere + it starts with, say, a small water droplet which freezes into a very tiny piece of ice and then that grows and gets this hexagonal shape + then, as it gets larger, these corners of the hexagon sprout branches and they can become very elaborate as it grows larger + one thing you can do, as a physicist, is you can try to calculate how many ways there are to make a snowflake, and I've done that + it's a very large number + The number of ways to make a complex snowflake is far greater than the total number of atoms in the universe + with such large numbers, you can say fairly confidently that if you looked at all the snowflakes that grew on earth, you would never see one that looked exactly the same.

Full Table Cuts With Blunt, Missing Or Broken Corners

(via Diamond Cuts in Historic Jewelry:1381-1910) Herbert Tillander writes:

The Great Cross of Francis I, of about 1540, contained five Table Cut diamonds, one Burgundian Point Cut and three faceted Gothic Roses. In 1988, Morel presented a wrong faceting design of the three drop-shaped gems: the quasi rond diamond alone was a Burgandian Point Cut whereas the drops, described as taillés en face—i.e flat-bottomed—can only have been Gothic, trihedrally faceted Rose Cuts. Bapst, writing in 1888, simply indicated that the diamonds were faceted. The 1559 Crown inventory gave the following description: ‘Une grande croix composée de neuf grands dyamans, c’est a scavoir cinq grandes tables faisant la croix au plus hault , au dessoubs ung dyaman quasi rond et trois aultres dyamans en larmes ou fers de lances taillés en face faisant le pied de la croix auquel pied pend une perle en poire.’ The Cross was pawned several times before disappearing completely.

The ‘Elephant with a Tower’ pendant is one of the central pieces in the Schatzkammer der Residenz, Munich. It dates from between 1557 and 1559, and was made in Munich, probably by Hans Reimer; it is 5.6 cm high. The jewel is still in the former Royal Collection, though no longer in its original state. The fine large Table Cut diamond has unfortunately been replaced by a cheap Blister pearl, the suberb ruby by a spinel, and the exquisite pearl which originally hung from the pendant has disappeared and not been replaced. It was possible to reproduce, from a portrait of Duchess Anne among the miniatures painted by Hans Mielich, the cut of the original diamond, which was found to be perfectly fashioned High Table, 22.3 x 15.9 mm in size, with a table facet of ideal size. The small diamonds which now fill the corners round the Blister pearl are eighteenth century Rose Cuts.

The sitter in the portrait of Christine of Lorraine, Grand Duchess of Tuscany, by Scipione Pulzone, 1590 (Museo degli Argenti, Palazoo Pitti, Florence) is wearing jewels worthy of the wife of the powerful and wealthy Medici Grand Duke Ferdinand I. In contrast to those of other contemporary Florentine princesses, the Duchess Christine’s larger diamonds are all High Table and Mirror Cuts. Some are square and others rectangular, but they are all appear to be very well proportioned.

A three-dimensional St George pendant, with both the front and the back worked in great detail, is the best known, and artistically the finest, of all the Renaissance pendants in the Grϋnes Gewölbe. Here, we shall concentrate on the diamonds in the pedestal. Either the master goldsmith could not find a perfect set of gems, or the jewel was made to order and the jeweler was given only a very limited selection of Table Cut diamonds to work with. The stones themselves are of three types: in the center, blending with red cabochons, are two oblong Table Cuts; next to these are two well-matched Mirror Cuts, one on either side; at the ends, placed vertically because they are smaller than the other stones, are two more Table Cuts. These may have been all the jeweler had at his disposal, but it is also possible that he chose them and positioned them deliberately because they marked so clearly the end of the pedestal while maintaining the height of the rest of the diamonds in the row.

As long as the settings remained clean and the underlying foiling still reflected the incident light, the pedestal formed a bright base for the rest of the jewel. The fact that the cuts were mixed was noticeable only on close examination and did not disturb the integrity of the jewel as a whole. Today, the light entering the jewel is not reflected back at the viewer and the table facets themselves appear disturbingly dark, even black.

Full Table Cuts With Blunt, Missing Or Broken Corners (continued)

Early Jewelry Of The British Isles

(via 5000 Years of Gems and Jewelry) Frances Rogers and Alice Beard writes:

2. Anglo Saxon Jewelry

It would seem that whatever a conquered people might feel toward the Romans who came as victors to settle in their country, they were always ready enough to do as the Romans did—in respect to jewelry. For more than three hundred years after the Roman invasion, British jewelry followed, to a great extent, the fashions set by Italy.

With the invading Teutonic tribes in the fifth century there came a new wave of influence, which was, of course, reflected in personal ornaments. Nevertheless, the established traditions of the Roman and Celtic arts were too deeprooted to be easily overthrown, and the work of the Anglo-Saxon goldsmith was never entirely free from their influence.

Both the skill and originality of the goldsmith-jeweler was stimulated by the constant demand for personal ornaments. He was called upon to fashion rings and bracelets intended to be given as rewards of valor; he made amulets of amber and necklaces of precious stones in settings of twisted gold. He made clever use of thin slices of garnet or millefiori glass or pastes of various colors, employing them like bits of mosaic in representations of birds, flowers, or geometrical designs. Many brooches were shaped like birds whose feathers and colorful markings were wrought in bright inlays of glass set within partitions of tiny wires soldered to a metal base.

Following the introduction of Christian art from Rome and Byzantium, Anglo-Saxon jewels took on new forms and character. The Byzantine school sought to combine exquisite treatment of detail with the Oriental love of color. Under this influence the Saxon goldsmith became a master in the use of colorful translucent cloisonńe enamel and delicate gold work.

The ring worn by the Anglo-Saxon at an earlier period had been very primitive indeed, usually a bit of wire twisted into a hoop or spiral. But the rings of the later period show considerable technical skill, especially in the use of neillo, a bluish black metallic inlay which was used extensively on both gold and silver. There can scarcely be a better description of its nature than that given in an ancient manuscript. Probably the author was one of those earnest monks bent on disseminating knowledge of the arts. Says he:

When you wish to make niello, take equal parts of quick-silver, copper and lead and put them in a vessel that they may cook together. Then take of sulphur, as much as is the total of the metals, mix it with them and stir it. When it has calcined, cast it anywhere, where there is clean water, mix it with borax and paint what you wish in the circles. The ‘circles’ are the design carved on the metal base, thus forming grooves to retain the niello inlay.

One of the finest examples of a ring enriched with niello is the massive Anglo-Saxon ring of the ninth century, now belonging to the Victoria and Albert Museum. It is thought to have been made for Alhstan, Bishop of Sherborne, and is composed of four circular and four lozenge-shaped pieces. The latter are ornamented with conventionalized animals, and on the roundels are the letters of the Bishop’s name. The most famous of all English rings belongs to the same period. It is also decorated with niello and bears the name Ethelwulf.

Often niello, enamel work, and inlaid stones were used in combination on a single piece of jewelry such as a brooch. A magnificent example is the Tara Brooch, found on the seashore about a hundred years ago near Bettystown, Cape Louth, Ireland. Aside from its interest as a beautiful and world-famous jewel, it is a fine example of the goldsmith’s art. The while bronze metal is hammered, chased, engraved and thickly gilded. In addition to niello, granulation and filigree, the brooch is further enriched with glass, amber, and blue and red enamels mounted like gems.

Counted among the most famous relics of England is the Alfred Jewel, believed to have been made under the personal direction of King Alfred himself. It was found at Newton Park near Somerset, in 1693, and was later presented to the Ashmoleon Museum at Oxford. No one is certain what the jewel was intended for. Possibly it formed the central ornament in a crown, or it may have been worn as a pendant. In general shape it is an oval elongated at the lower end, somewhat like a hand glass with a wide handle. The design represents a man, supposed by some to be Christ, holding a scepter in each hand; by others it is thought to be the figure of a saint. Legend has it that St Cuthbert appeared to the Saxon King during his stay on the Isle of Althelney, where, in 878, Alfred sought refuge from the Danes—hence the saint’s effigy on the jewel.

The combined arts of the goldsmith were lavished on that jewel. It is decorated with colorful semi-translucent enamels, filigree, and granular goldworks; and around its sloping sides, in letters of gold, runs the legend: Aelfred Mec Heht Gewyrcan (Alfred ordered me to be made).

The ancient practice of burying weapons and personal ornaments with the dead continued well into the eighth century, and to this custom is due the fact that many beautiful specimens of jewelry of that period are still preserved.

But with the coming of Charlemagne a new attitude toward articles of value was introduced. The Emperor forbade the burying of jewels. He considered it a pagan custom, out of keeping with Christian ideology. Furthermore, it was wasteful.

No doubt Charlemagne’s law was wise in its time, nevertheless jewels kept in circulation have far less chance of survival than those stowed safely underground, and we of today are the losers by reason of that law. A conspicuous dearth of surviving jewels marks the period from the reign of Charlemagne onward for some centuries.

However, we are not entirely without knowledge concerning the methods and techniques of the day because certain meticulous records of the goldsmith’s craft were made at the time and still exist.

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture

(via The Outline of Art) William Orpen writes:

In his discourse to the Academy students in 1778, Reynolds observed that blue should not be massed together in a picture, whereupon Gainsborough proceeded subsequently to paint his famous ‘Blue Boy’ and, by his brilliant success with the boy’s blue dress, put Reynolds in the wrong. It is highly probably that the blues which figure so prominently in his beautiful portrait of ‘Mrs Siddons’ are another expression of Gainsborough’s disapproval of Sir Joshua’s dogmatic teaching. We have only to compare this Gainsborough portrait with Reynolds’s painting of the same actress as ‘The Tragic Muse’ to realize the difference between the two artists. Reynolds painted his picture in 1783, Gainsborough his in 1784, when Mrs Siddons was twenty eight; but, though actually a year younger, everyone will agree that the actress looks years older in Sir Joshua’s picture. Reynolds emphasized the intellectual qualities of the great tragedienne, his endeavor was to show the sublimity of her mind; Gainsborough was content to show the charm and vivacity of her person, and that is why Mrs Siddons looks younger in his portrait. Another temperamental difference between the two artists is shown in their hobbies; while Sir Joshua was interested in literature and delighted in conversing with the learned, Gainsborough’s ruling passion was music. He was not only a good musician himself but was completely carried away by the playing of others. Once when a talented amateur, a Colonel Hamilton, was playing the violin at his house, Gainsborough called out, ‘Go on, go on, and I will give the picture of ‘The Boy at the Stile’ which you have so often wished to buy of me.’ The Colonel ‘went on’ and eventually returned home with the coveted picture of his reward. This love of music makes itself felt in Gainsborough’s pictures, which are lyrical, the paintings of an artist who sings, while those of Reynolds are more philosophical, the pictures of a man who thinks in paint.

Of all the English eighteenth century portraitists Gainsborough is the lightest and airiest, and in freshness of color and in gracefulness without affectation his portraits more than rival those of Reynolds. His ‘Miss Haverfield’ is more of little lady than any of Sir Joshua’s children, and though her gentility may not be accounted of virtue, and while we must admit that Reynold’s ‘Age of Innocence’ has more psychological profundity, ye we cannot find another portrait in the world which excels this Gainsborough in rendering the flower-like charm of childhood.

Though by his portraits Gainsborough acquired so considerable a fortune that he could afford to have country houses at Richmond and in Hampshire as well as his town house, his landscapes rarely found buyers, and remained ‘admired and unsold till they stood ranged in long lines from his hall to his painting room.’ At his death his house was filled with his own landscapes. The end came with some suddenness. A pain in the neck, to which he had paid little attention, turned out to be due to a cancer, and when the physicians pronounced his case hopeless, he settled his affairs with composure and prepared to meet death. He was particularly anxious to be reconciled with Sir Joshua and begged him to visit him on his death bed. When Reynolds came an affecting reconciliation took place: ‘We are all going to heaven,’ said Gainsborough, ‘and Vandyck is of the party.’ Thomas Gainsborough died on August 2, 1788, and by his own desire was buried as privately as possible in Kew Churchyard. Sir Joshua Reynolds was one of the pall-bearers, and in his presidential address to the Academy in the following year he paid an eloquent tribute to the memory of his former rival.

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture (continued)