The book The Global Business Leader: Practical Advice for Success in a Transcultural Marketplace by J. Frank Brown is full of fantastic business advice + I believe his ideas are not only timely but spot on.
Useful link:
http://knowledge.insead.edu/contents/FrankBrown.cfm
Saturday, March 15, 2008
John Mawe’s Blunders
(via Diamond Cuts in Historic Jewelry:1381-1910) Herbert Tillander writes:
For many years I wondered who had first introduced the idea that, for a Brilliant to be correctly shaped, it was desirable that it should have an overall height equal to its wideth. Then I came across the following passage from the second edition of John Mawe’s Treatise on Diamonds: ‘The rule to be adopted in regulating the height of the brilliant is (supposing the stone to be a regular octahedron), to divide it into eighteen parts. Five-eighteenths are cut away to form the table, and one-eighteenth for the collet, which will reduce the height one-third, and the diameter of the collet will be one-fifth of the table. If these distances are preserved, the collet will play in the center of every facet, but if there is any variation, it will play higher or lower, and greatly diminish the intensity of luster...’
Mawe cannot have meant an octahedron, but rather a bipyramid reduced in advance to a shape with an overall height equal to its width—he goes on to repeat the rules of Jeffries and to give additional proof, both in his illustration of a correctly proportioned Brilliant and in his own text: ‘the inclination of the facets to the girdle ought to be 45°, and the bizel should be inclined to the table at the supplement of the same angle.’ His first statement is an obvious misprint or oversight, yet no writer appears to have noticed it, not even Paul Grodzinski who, in his reprinted edition of Mawe’s Treatise, comments on a number of other details but not on this. Many other writers have simply accepted the error, believing that Mawe was referring to early Brilliant Cuts with octehedral main angles. But it is obvious that a stone of this sort could have been fashioned only in the very rare instances where the rough stone was a regular octahedron. No cutter would ever have started fashioning a stone by transforming an irregular crystal into an octahedral shape, thereby considerably reducing its weight. The old rules remained in force and no changes in standard proportions were made until the late nineteenth century.
Of course, cutters did not always observe the rules for ideal proportions, but even the earliest Square Cut Brilliants were hardly likely to be fashioned from octahedral rough; for the most part they were refashionings of obselete cuts. If an old square-shaped Point or Table Cut displayed satisfying light effects, the gem was simply faceted into a Brilliant without changing the proportions. It is possible, presumably, that such recuts may occasionally have served as prototypes for fashioning directly from octehedral rough.
For many years I wondered who had first introduced the idea that, for a Brilliant to be correctly shaped, it was desirable that it should have an overall height equal to its wideth. Then I came across the following passage from the second edition of John Mawe’s Treatise on Diamonds: ‘The rule to be adopted in regulating the height of the brilliant is (supposing the stone to be a regular octahedron), to divide it into eighteen parts. Five-eighteenths are cut away to form the table, and one-eighteenth for the collet, which will reduce the height one-third, and the diameter of the collet will be one-fifth of the table. If these distances are preserved, the collet will play in the center of every facet, but if there is any variation, it will play higher or lower, and greatly diminish the intensity of luster...’
Mawe cannot have meant an octahedron, but rather a bipyramid reduced in advance to a shape with an overall height equal to its width—he goes on to repeat the rules of Jeffries and to give additional proof, both in his illustration of a correctly proportioned Brilliant and in his own text: ‘the inclination of the facets to the girdle ought to be 45°, and the bizel should be inclined to the table at the supplement of the same angle.’ His first statement is an obvious misprint or oversight, yet no writer appears to have noticed it, not even Paul Grodzinski who, in his reprinted edition of Mawe’s Treatise, comments on a number of other details but not on this. Many other writers have simply accepted the error, believing that Mawe was referring to early Brilliant Cuts with octehedral main angles. But it is obvious that a stone of this sort could have been fashioned only in the very rare instances where the rough stone was a regular octahedron. No cutter would ever have started fashioning a stone by transforming an irregular crystal into an octahedral shape, thereby considerably reducing its weight. The old rules remained in force and no changes in standard proportions were made until the late nineteenth century.
Of course, cutters did not always observe the rules for ideal proportions, but even the earliest Square Cut Brilliants were hardly likely to be fashioned from octahedral rough; for the most part they were refashionings of obselete cuts. If an old square-shaped Point or Table Cut displayed satisfying light effects, the gem was simply faceted into a Brilliant without changing the proportions. It is possible, presumably, that such recuts may occasionally have served as prototypes for fashioning directly from octehedral rough.
The Romantic Movement In France
(via The Outline of Art) William Orpen writes:
The Art of Delacroix, Gericault, Corot, Millet, And The Barbizon School
1
Some thirty years before the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood began its triumphant fight in England for the free expression of new ideals in art, a similar struggle between old and new schools of artists was waged with extraordinary vehemence in France. We saw how under the Revolution and the Empire a cold Classicism was the dominating tendency in French painting, and how gradually there arose among the younger artists a reaction against this traditional art. The spirit of unrest, which profoundly agitated France after the restoration of the Bourbons and culminated in the revolutionary explosion of 1848, first began to show itself in the art and literature of the younger generation. On one hand were the defenders of tradition, of the ‘grand style’ of Academic painting, defenders of the classic ideal based on the sculpture of ancient Greece and Rome; on the other were ardent young reformers, intoxicated with the color and movement of life itself, who found their inspiration, not in the classics, but in romantic literature, in Dante, Shakespeare, Goethe, Byron, and Sir Walter Scott. Passion, movement, the imaginative expression of life were the aims of this group of artists, who became known as the Romantics.
‘Who will deliver us from the Greeks and Romans?’ was a catchword among the young enthusiasts who found more beauty in life and Nature than in the masterpieces of ancient sculpture. The deliverer was found in the ranks of the reactionaries, in a young artist who was the pupil of Guérin the classicist. Jean Louis André Théodore Géricault was born at Rouen in 1791 and came to Paris about 1806, studying first with Carle Vernet and afterwards with Guérin. His method of drawing was so different from that approved by the school of David, that it exasperated his ‘correct’ and academic master, who told Géricault he had better give up art because it was evident he would never succeed in it.
One day as Géricault was walking along a road near St. Cloud, a dapple-grey horse in a cart turned restive and plunged about in the sunshine. Géricault whipped out his sketch-book and jotted down notes of the movement of the animal and the play of light and shade on his dappled coat, and these notes gave him the idea of a great picture. He would paint an equestrian portrait, not the stiff image of a man on a wooden horse, but a vivid presentment of the plunging, sun-illumined animal he had seen. He persuaded his friend Lieutenant Dieudonné to pose for the rider, and he had a cab-horse brought round each morning that he might freshen his eye with the points of the horse. Working with the highest enthusiasm and energy Géricault, in the space of a fortnight, produced his ‘Officier des Chasseurs à Cheval,’ now in Louvre. This picture created a sensation in the Paris Salon of 1812.
Two years afterwards Géricault repeated his success with a companion picture, ‘The Wounded Cuirassier,’ and after a short period of military service—when he had further opportunities of studying his favorite equine models—he went in 1817 to Italy, where he ‘trembled’ before the works of Michael Angleo, who henceforward became his inspiration and idol.
When Géricault returned to France in 1818, he found all Paris talking about nothing but a naval disaster of two years earlier, an account of which had just been published by two of the survivors. The drama of the shipwreck of the Medusa seized upon the imagination of the artist, who determined to make it the subject of a picture. He spent months in collecting material for this work. He found the carpenter of the Medusa and induced him to make a model of the famous raft by which the survivors were saved. He spent days in hospitals studying the effects of illness and suffering. He persuaded two of the surviving officers of the ship to give him sittings, and painted one leaning against the mast and the other holding out his two arms towards the rescuing ship on the horizon. All his models were taken from life, and it is interesting to note that his friend, the famous artist Eugène Delacroix, posed for the man who lies inert on the left with his head against the edge of the raft.
The Romantic Movement In France (continued)
The Art of Delacroix, Gericault, Corot, Millet, And The Barbizon School
1
Some thirty years before the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood began its triumphant fight in England for the free expression of new ideals in art, a similar struggle between old and new schools of artists was waged with extraordinary vehemence in France. We saw how under the Revolution and the Empire a cold Classicism was the dominating tendency in French painting, and how gradually there arose among the younger artists a reaction against this traditional art. The spirit of unrest, which profoundly agitated France after the restoration of the Bourbons and culminated in the revolutionary explosion of 1848, first began to show itself in the art and literature of the younger generation. On one hand were the defenders of tradition, of the ‘grand style’ of Academic painting, defenders of the classic ideal based on the sculpture of ancient Greece and Rome; on the other were ardent young reformers, intoxicated with the color and movement of life itself, who found their inspiration, not in the classics, but in romantic literature, in Dante, Shakespeare, Goethe, Byron, and Sir Walter Scott. Passion, movement, the imaginative expression of life were the aims of this group of artists, who became known as the Romantics.
‘Who will deliver us from the Greeks and Romans?’ was a catchword among the young enthusiasts who found more beauty in life and Nature than in the masterpieces of ancient sculpture. The deliverer was found in the ranks of the reactionaries, in a young artist who was the pupil of Guérin the classicist. Jean Louis André Théodore Géricault was born at Rouen in 1791 and came to Paris about 1806, studying first with Carle Vernet and afterwards with Guérin. His method of drawing was so different from that approved by the school of David, that it exasperated his ‘correct’ and academic master, who told Géricault he had better give up art because it was evident he would never succeed in it.
One day as Géricault was walking along a road near St. Cloud, a dapple-grey horse in a cart turned restive and plunged about in the sunshine. Géricault whipped out his sketch-book and jotted down notes of the movement of the animal and the play of light and shade on his dappled coat, and these notes gave him the idea of a great picture. He would paint an equestrian portrait, not the stiff image of a man on a wooden horse, but a vivid presentment of the plunging, sun-illumined animal he had seen. He persuaded his friend Lieutenant Dieudonné to pose for the rider, and he had a cab-horse brought round each morning that he might freshen his eye with the points of the horse. Working with the highest enthusiasm and energy Géricault, in the space of a fortnight, produced his ‘Officier des Chasseurs à Cheval,’ now in Louvre. This picture created a sensation in the Paris Salon of 1812.
Two years afterwards Géricault repeated his success with a companion picture, ‘The Wounded Cuirassier,’ and after a short period of military service—when he had further opportunities of studying his favorite equine models—he went in 1817 to Italy, where he ‘trembled’ before the works of Michael Angleo, who henceforward became his inspiration and idol.
When Géricault returned to France in 1818, he found all Paris talking about nothing but a naval disaster of two years earlier, an account of which had just been published by two of the survivors. The drama of the shipwreck of the Medusa seized upon the imagination of the artist, who determined to make it the subject of a picture. He spent months in collecting material for this work. He found the carpenter of the Medusa and induced him to make a model of the famous raft by which the survivors were saved. He spent days in hospitals studying the effects of illness and suffering. He persuaded two of the surviving officers of the ship to give him sittings, and painted one leaning against the mast and the other holding out his two arms towards the rescuing ship on the horizon. All his models were taken from life, and it is interesting to note that his friend, the famous artist Eugène Delacroix, posed for the man who lies inert on the left with his head against the edge of the raft.
The Romantic Movement In France (continued)
New Energy Sources
Earth: The Sequel: The Race to Reinvent Energy and Stop Global Warming by Fred Krupp + Miriam Horn is an inspiring book full of ideas + I think there will be new start-ups in the energy sector + some of them will be very lucky!
Useful link:
www.edf.org
Useful link:
www.edf.org
The Chinese Art Market
I found the article Pump and Dump by Gady A. Epstein @ http://www.forbes.com/global/2008/0324/022.html interesting and insightful + here is what Liang Changsheng, art director of the Contemporary Artwork Auction firm in Beijing has to say:
'The trick of creating that next hot artist is an idiot's game. First get critics to write about him(The critics are paid by artists, auction houses and galleries for this service). Then organize exhibitions to introduce his work (That's paid for, too, even at the most prestigious national museums). Then you can put the work in auction with an establishing price and buy it back yourself in order to set an example for the public. Of course, it would be better if some other bidders join in.'
This reminded me of the colored stone + diamond business, especially the high-ticket stones (rubies, sapphires, emeralds, colorless + fancy colored diamonds) with guaranteed best-grade certificates + origin report. It is definitely an idiot's game!
'The trick of creating that next hot artist is an idiot's game. First get critics to write about him(The critics are paid by artists, auction houses and galleries for this service). Then organize exhibitions to introduce his work (That's paid for, too, even at the most prestigious national museums). Then you can put the work in auction with an establishing price and buy it back yourself in order to set an example for the public. Of course, it would be better if some other bidders join in.'
This reminded me of the colored stone + diamond business, especially the high-ticket stones (rubies, sapphires, emeralds, colorless + fancy colored diamonds) with guaranteed best-grade certificates + origin report. It is definitely an idiot's game!
Ian Gittler
Ian Gittler is an author + photographer + designer living in New York City. I liked his work.
Useful link:
www.iangittler.com
Useful link:
www.iangittler.com
The Importance Of Systemic Thinking
I found the article about Toyota by J. Brian Atwater + Paul Pittman on Systematic Thinking interesting because the issues that are related to systematic thinking are also applicable to gem identification.
Useful link:
www.apics.org
Useful link:
www.apics.org
Friday, March 14, 2008
Resource Generation
The nonprofit Resource Generation offer programs and seminars for wealthy adults to better understand themselves as philanthropists, their place in the socio-economic system, and their capacities to contribute to social change + I liked the concept.
Useful links:
www.resourcegeneration.org
www.ackerman.org
www.criticalresistance.org
www.thresholdfoundation.org
www.fordfound.org
www.philanthropy.iupui.edu
Useful links:
www.resourcegeneration.org
www.ackerman.org
www.criticalresistance.org
www.thresholdfoundation.org
www.fordfound.org
www.philanthropy.iupui.edu
Harding Brothers
The Bristol-based Harding Brothers operates a number of cruise ships whose itineraries take them, literally, all over the world + the jewelry sales have gone up with the introduction of leading brands which I believe is due to a magic combination of offering the right brands, targeting product to the location and employing salespeople who really know the business.
I think it's a brilliant idea.
Useful link:
www.hardingretail.co.uk
I think it's a brilliant idea.
Useful link:
www.hardingretail.co.uk
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) Update
The U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has issued new guidelines for the jewelry industry via http://www.fincen.gov/20080310.html which I think might impact compliance obligations.
Useful links:
www.fincen.gov
www.jvclegal.org
Useful links:
www.fincen.gov
www.jvclegal.org
Marc Prensky
Don't Bother Me Mom--I'm Learning! by Marc Prensky is a fascinating book + the educational value of the games are priceless.
Useful link:
www.marcprensky.com
Useful link:
www.marcprensky.com
Jeffries’ Square Brilliant
(via Diamond Cuts in Historic Jewelry:1381-1910) Herbert Tillander writes:
David Jeffries was the first writer to describe the Square Brilliant Cut. In 1750, when his Treatise on Diamonds first appeared, the Square Cut had been in fashion for about fifty years and was the dominant Brilliant Cut. Round, oval and drop-shaped Brilliants were also fashioned but were considered Fancy Cuts; to these Jeffries only devoted a single page.
Jeffries, a jeweler and a dealer in diamonds, was fortunate enough to live in London at a time when cutters in that city were famous for the quality of their work. He devoted himself to the study of diamond fashioning and discussed his theories in great detail with the master cutters, selecting for analysis only the most perfect Brilliants. The results were theoretical, in that they ignored the fact that cutters were obliged to produce the most profitable gem possible from each crystal or piece of rough. However, Jeffries was a pioneer in that he showed the way for both jewelers and laymen to discover ‘a well or even ill made Brilliant’. His fifty-five diagrams show ideally proportioned Brilliants for weights from 1-100ct. For each diamond he gave the correct depth and the correct culet size. A comparison of any Square Cut Brilliant would show whether it matched the weight indicated for its size or whether it was lumpy or spread.
Unlike that of the ‘Peruzzi’ design and the Round Brilliants, the table facet of Jeffries’ Square Brilliant is not a regular octagon. Instead, it has fourfold symmetry with the facet edges meeting alternately at 150° and 120°, a shape which goes suprisingly well with the outline. The facet edges forming the internal star are not straight, but bent at an angle towards the center of the gem and therefore not parallel to the other facet edges. The main angles of both crown and pavilion are 45°. The height of the crown and depth of the pavilion have a ratio of 1:2, resulting in a table size of about 56 percent. The girdle should be as thin as possible, though not ‘knife-edged’ (to avoid chipping). The size of the culet conforms with the results of the calculations made by Eppler roughly two hundred years later, i.e. 8 to 10 percent.
David Jeffries was the first writer to describe the Square Brilliant Cut. In 1750, when his Treatise on Diamonds first appeared, the Square Cut had been in fashion for about fifty years and was the dominant Brilliant Cut. Round, oval and drop-shaped Brilliants were also fashioned but were considered Fancy Cuts; to these Jeffries only devoted a single page.
Jeffries, a jeweler and a dealer in diamonds, was fortunate enough to live in London at a time when cutters in that city were famous for the quality of their work. He devoted himself to the study of diamond fashioning and discussed his theories in great detail with the master cutters, selecting for analysis only the most perfect Brilliants. The results were theoretical, in that they ignored the fact that cutters were obliged to produce the most profitable gem possible from each crystal or piece of rough. However, Jeffries was a pioneer in that he showed the way for both jewelers and laymen to discover ‘a well or even ill made Brilliant’. His fifty-five diagrams show ideally proportioned Brilliants for weights from 1-100ct. For each diamond he gave the correct depth and the correct culet size. A comparison of any Square Cut Brilliant would show whether it matched the weight indicated for its size or whether it was lumpy or spread.
Unlike that of the ‘Peruzzi’ design and the Round Brilliants, the table facet of Jeffries’ Square Brilliant is not a regular octagon. Instead, it has fourfold symmetry with the facet edges meeting alternately at 150° and 120°, a shape which goes suprisingly well with the outline. The facet edges forming the internal star are not straight, but bent at an angle towards the center of the gem and therefore not parallel to the other facet edges. The main angles of both crown and pavilion are 45°. The height of the crown and depth of the pavilion have a ratio of 1:2, resulting in a table size of about 56 percent. The girdle should be as thin as possible, though not ‘knife-edged’ (to avoid chipping). The size of the culet conforms with the results of the calculations made by Eppler roughly two hundred years later, i.e. 8 to 10 percent.
The Victorian Age
(via The Outline of Art) William Orpen writes:
5
Watts for nobility of thought and conception and Stevens for grandeur of design and execution will, in all probablity, be considered by posterity to have been the two most eminent artists of the Victorian era, but though it may be less easy to find, among the painters, the outstanding giants who mark the same period in literature, the very number of names as distinguished as they as they are familiar show how active and flourishing the arts were during the Queen’s long reign. Many artists who enjoyed, and still enjoy, a wide popularity must necessarily be omitted from this Outline, but no survey, however hasty, of Victorian painting can ignore the band of Scottish artists who won fame in the south as well as in the north. Among them we may mention the historical and romantic painter John Pettie (1839-93); Peter Graham, the cattle painter; John MacWhirter, the popular painter of the Highlands; William M’Taggart, unrivalled in his delicate yet vigorous renderings of foaming seas and windy shores; and Sir W Q Orchardson, the leader of this band of Scottish students, and one of the most polished, typical, and popular of all Victorian artists. William Quiller Orchardson (1835-1910) was born in Edinburgh and came to London about 1862, and thereafter maintained and held his position as one of the most popular of Academy exhibitors. He excelled in a variety of subjects: his ‘Sir Walter Gilbey’ and ‘Master Baby’—a group of his wife and child—rank among the great portraits of the nineteenth century; ‘Napoleon on Board the Beellerophon is one of the best known and most admired of modern historical paintings; but perhaps the best loved of all his works are those paintings of contemporary life, like ‘The Tender Chord’, which, without being positively ‘anecdotal,’ yet suggest a story and convey a sentiment. It was the distinction of Orchardson that his story-telling was never crude and obvious, his sentiment was always gentle and refined, his execution was suave and accomplished, so that his pictures, often representing moods of wistful reverie, charmed the eye of the beholder and at the same time conjured up a scene which dwelt in the memory and made its own appeal to the imagination.
5
Watts for nobility of thought and conception and Stevens for grandeur of design and execution will, in all probablity, be considered by posterity to have been the two most eminent artists of the Victorian era, but though it may be less easy to find, among the painters, the outstanding giants who mark the same period in literature, the very number of names as distinguished as they as they are familiar show how active and flourishing the arts were during the Queen’s long reign. Many artists who enjoyed, and still enjoy, a wide popularity must necessarily be omitted from this Outline, but no survey, however hasty, of Victorian painting can ignore the band of Scottish artists who won fame in the south as well as in the north. Among them we may mention the historical and romantic painter John Pettie (1839-93); Peter Graham, the cattle painter; John MacWhirter, the popular painter of the Highlands; William M’Taggart, unrivalled in his delicate yet vigorous renderings of foaming seas and windy shores; and Sir W Q Orchardson, the leader of this band of Scottish students, and one of the most polished, typical, and popular of all Victorian artists. William Quiller Orchardson (1835-1910) was born in Edinburgh and came to London about 1862, and thereafter maintained and held his position as one of the most popular of Academy exhibitors. He excelled in a variety of subjects: his ‘Sir Walter Gilbey’ and ‘Master Baby’—a group of his wife and child—rank among the great portraits of the nineteenth century; ‘Napoleon on Board the Beellerophon is one of the best known and most admired of modern historical paintings; but perhaps the best loved of all his works are those paintings of contemporary life, like ‘The Tender Chord’, which, without being positively ‘anecdotal,’ yet suggest a story and convey a sentiment. It was the distinction of Orchardson that his story-telling was never crude and obvious, his sentiment was always gentle and refined, his execution was suave and accomplished, so that his pictures, often representing moods of wistful reverie, charmed the eye of the beholder and at the same time conjured up a scene which dwelt in the memory and made its own appeal to the imagination.
Art: Creative Ways To Manufacture Demand
The article Pump and Dump by Gady A. Epstein via http://www.forbes.com/global/2008/0324/022.html explains the tricks of the art business in China + here is what Liang Changsheng, art director of the Contemporary Artwork Auction firm in Beijing has to say: The trick of creating that next hot artist is an idiot's game. First get critics to write about him (The critics are paid by artists, auction houses and galleries for this service). Then organize exhibitions to introduce his work (That's paid for, too, even at the most prestigious national museums). Then you can put the work in auction with an establishing price and buy it back yourself in order to set an example for the public. Of course, it would be better if some other bidders join in.'
SAD Syndrome
Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) is a mood disorder + the sufferers experience depressive symptoms in the winter + when the depressive symptoms occur in summer rather than winter, the condition is often referred to as Reverse Seasonal Affective Disorder (RSAD) and can include heightened anxiety, fatigue, etc + the seasonal mood variations are believed to be related to light + I have come across many dealers, diamond/colored stone graders and jewelers who are SAD and the best thing to do is not to show stones or jewelry when you recognize the symptoms.
Useful links:
www.sada.org.uk
www.mayoclinic.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasonal_affective_disorder
Useful links:
www.sada.org.uk
www.mayoclinic.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasonal_affective_disorder
Colored Stone Market Update
White sapphires are in high demand for color enhancements (coating + surface diffusion), especially beryllium treatment + colorless/white sapphires are also perceived as diamond simulants, but now beryllium treatment has dramatically changed the market landscape + many of the small colorless sapphires used in inexpensive jewelry are synthetic flame fusion sapphires.
Heard On The Street
The colored gemstone treaters from Thailand are always ahead of the gem testing laboratories in the treatment vs. detection challenge.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
D Diamond Concept
I found the new concept restaurant + lounge bar called 'D Diamond' @ the Elements shopping mall in Hong Kong, by Damiani, brilliant! + I believe it's one-of-a-kind restaurant embedded with Damiani jewels in special showcases + Italian/Japanese cuisine.
Useful link:
www.damiani.it
www.hiphongkong.com
Useful link:
www.damiani.it
www.hiphongkong.com
Lord Of War
Victor Bout, one of the world’s most famous + wanted arms traffickers + blood (conflict) diamond dealer, was arrested in Thailand here + he inspired the Nicholas Cage movie 'Lord of War'.
Useful links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399295
New York Times magazine profile of Bout
Useful links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399295
New York Times magazine profile of Bout
Caire’s Theory Of The Gradual Evolution Of The Brilliant Cut
(via Diamond Cuts in Historic Jewelry:1381-1910) Herbert Tillander writes:
For about two hundred years now, people writing about diamonds have been speculating about how the Brilliant Cut came into being. None of the writers of the eighteenth century, not even Jeffries (1750) or Dutens (1776), concerned themselves with the historical aspects of the diamond industry. In fact, Caire, the Paris jeweler, appears to have been the first person to take an interest in how cuts developed.
He began by studying Jeffries’ sequence for the faceting of a Brilliant. In this, the rough pyramidal crystal was first symmetrized and lowered in height and then bruted into the shape of an old Table Cut with four crown facets. These were split into eight and then into sixteen facets before the stone was finally ‘brillianteered’. Caire suggested that what he called the Single Cut was achieved by slicing off the corners of the Table Cut, and the Double Cut by splitting the resultant eight facets.
Obviously he had to substantiate this theory by illustrating the sequence. As actual specimens did not exist, he selected the nearest thing he could find, four poorly fashioned Indian Cut diamonds from among stone imported simply as raw material to be fashioned into Brilliants. However, his examples were unconvincing, so he produced names of ‘inventors’ for two phases: Cardinal Mazarin for the Double Cut and purely fictitious character, Peruzzi, for the Brilliant Cut itself. In his revised edition of Bauer’s Edelsteinkunde (1932), the gem expert Schlossmacher unwisely reiterated Caire’s ideas and supplemented them with sketches of his version of the Peruzzi design. Caire’s theories were accepted as gospel and are still considered so by many people.
Not, however, Tom Brunés, who believed that ancient cabalistic geometry was the origin of the design of the Square Brilliant. In his monograph The Secrets of Ancient Geometry, he reproduced a diagram of a symbol that was already accepted several thousand years ago: a circle with a square, with two inverted triangles. To this, two more triangles were added. When the circle is removed, we are left with an eight-pointed star, a symbol widely used in architecture, especially in ancient temples, mosaic floors, stained glass windows, etc. It is in this star within a square that we can really see where the basic pattern of a Square Brilliant originated. A few more points are joined, a few more parallels ruled, and there we have the completed design of the Peruzzi Cut! As in ancient geometry, no measuring device is needed.
For about two hundred years now, people writing about diamonds have been speculating about how the Brilliant Cut came into being. None of the writers of the eighteenth century, not even Jeffries (1750) or Dutens (1776), concerned themselves with the historical aspects of the diamond industry. In fact, Caire, the Paris jeweler, appears to have been the first person to take an interest in how cuts developed.
He began by studying Jeffries’ sequence for the faceting of a Brilliant. In this, the rough pyramidal crystal was first symmetrized and lowered in height and then bruted into the shape of an old Table Cut with four crown facets. These were split into eight and then into sixteen facets before the stone was finally ‘brillianteered’. Caire suggested that what he called the Single Cut was achieved by slicing off the corners of the Table Cut, and the Double Cut by splitting the resultant eight facets.
Obviously he had to substantiate this theory by illustrating the sequence. As actual specimens did not exist, he selected the nearest thing he could find, four poorly fashioned Indian Cut diamonds from among stone imported simply as raw material to be fashioned into Brilliants. However, his examples were unconvincing, so he produced names of ‘inventors’ for two phases: Cardinal Mazarin for the Double Cut and purely fictitious character, Peruzzi, for the Brilliant Cut itself. In his revised edition of Bauer’s Edelsteinkunde (1932), the gem expert Schlossmacher unwisely reiterated Caire’s ideas and supplemented them with sketches of his version of the Peruzzi design. Caire’s theories were accepted as gospel and are still considered so by many people.
Not, however, Tom Brunés, who believed that ancient cabalistic geometry was the origin of the design of the Square Brilliant. In his monograph The Secrets of Ancient Geometry, he reproduced a diagram of a symbol that was already accepted several thousand years ago: a circle with a square, with two inverted triangles. To this, two more triangles were added. When the circle is removed, we are left with an eight-pointed star, a symbol widely used in architecture, especially in ancient temples, mosaic floors, stained glass windows, etc. It is in this star within a square that we can really see where the basic pattern of a Square Brilliant originated. A few more points are joined, a few more parallels ruled, and there we have the completed design of the Peruzzi Cut! As in ancient geometry, no measuring device is needed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)