jeroen

Wow, nice collection!

I don't know what the inside is. Zaboo told me that they cut one in half with a saw, and it gave sparks! But I am not cutting mine to find out what it is ;-)

But why did you not tell me what it was when I first ask you? You told me in an email: "I agree the unusual marble is a type of mochaware - you can see that better from the side view". Unless agateware is a type of mochaware, but if I understand correctly that you told Bob that agateware is not mochaware. I don't know, this is not my field. But afterwards you seems to know exactly what it was.Why not telling me in the first place? I am just trying to find out what it is, but it seemed clear to me it is very rare. The figure I gave your friend was just because i was a little angry after I received your email, and that it seems I am always in a position that when I want a marble I have to tell what I would like to pay, and when I sell a marble I always have to tell what I want for It. Well it seems to work that way, and I have to live with it. But I explained your friend that what I asked was based on nothing, I was just a little upset. And I told him that. And you describe the technique: "As you can see on this ball, the four main sections are assembled over the surface relatively crudely" I used google translator for the word crudely. I means something like rough, not precise. But now your are saying it is attractive. Am I the only one in the world who don't understand that crudely in this case means that it is attractive? All other collectors know instandly that crude is good? In the context you are using crudely I thought it was not ment as beeing attractive, but unattractive. And if it is not a marble, what is it? A carpet ball? Was anybody there when it was made back than? Perhaps it had even an other purpose, and was it made just as an object to be put on a nice place. Who knows? I could have been made as a marble back than. I like it anyway, for now I keep it en enjoy it. Jeroen

Don't worry Hansel, I understand it is better that I am not going to sell a marble from which I do not exactly know what is, to avoid problems. Beside I like it very much, It has a place in my showcase. I am not going to sell it. And a marble that is partly assembled crudely won't be desirable to most collectors. I know you like non glass marbles, but I think I have to find for you a better made example. (if that ever happens) This one does obvious not meet your high standards. I have seen your photos of many very nice agateware carpet balls, so this one won't add much. But it is very rare, and I looks nice, although some parts are crudely, and that is important for me. It fits well with my collection stoneware marbles. But you taught us a lot of this kind of agateware. It is very interesting material.

Very interesting to see how they make this pattern. It is not something that can be done quickly. Well it is something special that they take so much trouble to do it with a marble. If you just see how thin the layers of clay are in this marble. Now I can understand that this was not mass production. This could be only one that survived of the few that were made. I have attached another photo of the marble with nice details of this fine work. Jeroen

diameter is 58 mm, makes it 102 cm3 Weight is 165 grams. Makes it 1,6 grams per cm3. Density is 1.6. It is not hollow and not solid gutta percha latex. From internet: At room temperature, industrial gutta-percha is a solid skinlike substance that is white to yellowish-brown in color, with a density of 0.945–0.955 g/cm3 I don't know if industrial gutta percha latex is the same as natural. Perhaps only the outside is gutta percha. But what is the inside? Does paper mache has a density of 1.6? But still the marble is very nice!

Yes, this works. Very interesting article. I think figure 11 and 12 have the same pattern as on my marble.

Can you tell me how they have done it? They first make the gutta percha latex marble. Than the carve out all the place where the bronze alloy flakes should be. Than they just put that bronze alloy flake paint in a thickness just a little less than the depth of the carving, and than they put the clear coating on, to make it exact the same height as the rest of the marble? Seems almost impossible to do in that way. It still looks like lutz particles to me. Bob, you have a similar marble with this gold color. Do you think it is paint? Jeroen

Hansel, The last link is not working on my computer. Jeroen

Here is a close up from what I think is lutz. It is not paint. The particles are clearly visible. Jeroen

Hello Bob, Can you put a photo of them here on the forum? Are yours similar like the examples I put here, which I found on internet?

I am pretty sure it is stoneware. I do have several clay (I think they called bird egg) marbles, with many colors. They are about one inch or just bigger. If I take a similar size stoneware marble it is heavier. Stoneware is more dense than clay. I have just taken the weight of a stoneware marble that has the same size as the mosaic stoneware marble. They both have a weight of 192 grams. So most likely they are made of the same kind of stoneware. Jeroen

This marble came with the post yesterday. I have never seen one like this before, and I asked some other collectors, but they have not seen it before also. Jeroen vV thinks he knows what kind of marble this is. It is some kind of "mosaic stoneware". It probably dates from the beginning of the 17th century, and could also be late 16th century. In his study he has seen some stoneware jugs with this same pattern in musea that dates from that period. This pottery is very rare,only a few of this kind of stoneware is known to exist. And this is probably the only know marble of this kind of stoneware. The size is just over 2-3/16 inch. It is made in a same way as paperweights. They made a lot of small canes and than assemble them on a sphere, and smooth out the surface. This is a very difficult technique, and cost a lot of time. It has some production errors, as two of the "star" patterns are not finished properly. I have 16th/17th century stoneware marbles, and the glazing is the same kind as this marble. This one has a thick layer of glazing, so the outside of this marble has the aperiance of glass. Perhaps someone has seen a similar marble, and I hope someone can tell more about this marble, because I could be wrong about what I think it is. What ever it is, it is a very nice marble! Jeroen

This one came from England also. These marbles are made from a kind of latex (that is what wikipedia says) So I can imagine that lutz was mixed in this latex. As lutz is not glass, but a kind of copper particles, I think it could be mixed very easily. I posted a new photo made by daylight, so the colors are more acurate Jeroen

I don't know if it is exact the same kind of lutz used in glass, but search for old auctions at Morphy and there are two others with this gold color. Well perhaps there is a gutta percha expert out there who can tell what it is. Jeroen

It arrived today, together with an other fantastic marble, I will post about later. Look at this marble. Lutz all over! It seems to be on fire. It is mint, and just over 2-1/4 inch. I first thought it is not glass so could this be my kind of marble, but it is a true eye catcher! Jeroen

He has probably not seen that there is something wrong with the marble. As I wrote here, I was not the first who noticed, but I have send Charles an email, and explained why I made this post, and that I have no intention of calling him anything. If I knew who he was, I would have emailed him before.

Hello, 1. Have you seen how large this marble is? I like big marbles, except for a very very few exceptions I buy them smaller than 2 inch, So no, I am not bidding on this one. 2. There are a lot of collectors with much more experience than I have. I was not the one who discovered that this marble was reheated. The person who saw it, just told me this to show me they are not as rare as some collectors here on the forum think they are. Jeroen

Hello Stephany, I don't know who the seller is,

I won't be the Chief Fake Buster, there are people out there who are better than me. I was not the first who saw that there was something wrong with this marble. A little birdy told me. Jeroen

Do you have an example of those OHIO copies?

Hello Collectors, Another example of the fact that reheated marbles are no so rare: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=291029418596 This marble is reheated also. The pontils are wrong, probably made with a Dremel type tool. And take a good look at the 4th photo. In the left white spot, there are some of those lines that are typical with reheated marbles. This ebay mica onionskin is probably an older marble, and should have a faceted pontil, and not two pontils like this one. So watch out, because it is easy you will be fooled with such marbles. I have already learned a hard lesson with one of them! Jeroen

It has 4 bands

You should have bought that big yellow one from which you just removed the photo directly from me, that was cheaper...... But it Is a nice marble, and worth every penny. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-9-16-EGG-YOKE-TRANSITIONAL-HANDMADE-MARBLES-/131012328900?hash=item1e80f17dc4

Hi Ron, Thanks for you information. I have a small one that is used for stamp collectors. It has long wave. I looks like with my lamp I don't get the effect that you have. Perhaps I need a short wave black light. Jeroen