Other artifact type

Glass Trade Bead

Also called Trade Bead, European Glass Bead, Seed Bead, Drawn Glass Bead, Wound Glass Bead

Glass Trade BeadOntario Glass Bead Periods 1–3, A.D. 1580–1650 (Glencross et al. 2025); in quantity on Neutral sites after direct contact with European suppliers, 1608–1615 (Fitzgerald 1982); Fort Vancouver, Washington, 1829–1860 (NPS Fort Vancouver); Kijik, Alaska, late 1700s to about 1910 (NPS Kijik).Protohistoric to Historic

Key facts

Age
Ontario Glass Bead Periods 1–3, A.D. 1580–1650 (Glencross et al. 2025); in quantity on Neutral sites after direct contact with European suppliers, 1608–1615 (Fitzgerald 1982); Fort Vancouver, Washington, 1829–1860 (NPS Fort Vancouver); Kijik, Alaska, late 1700s to about 1910 (NPS Kijik).
Cultural period
Protohistoric to Historic
Culture
Huron-Wendat and Neutral (Ontario); Hudson's Bay Company fur trade
Material
European glass; types such as Cornaline d'Aleppo are probably Venetian (NPS Kijik).

More from the Historic period

Description

A glass trade bead is a European-made glass bead traded to Native people from the late 1500s onward. Forms run from seed beads under 2 mm across to large tubular beads, in round, oval, tubular and faceted shapes, single-coloured or layered and decorated with stripes and inlays (NPS Kijik; Fitzgerald 1982; Glencross et al. 2025).

Most were drawn: a hollow gather of glass was stretched into a long tube, cut into short lengths and often reheated and tumbled to round the ends; the bubble in the gather becomes the hole. Wound beads were made one at a time by winding glass around a wire mandrel, which allowed multicoloured designs; mold-pressed and blown beads are rare (NPS Fort Vancouver; NPS Kijik).

Kidd and Kidd (1970) classed glass beads by manufacture, shape, size and colour, with codes such as IIa31 still in use (Fitzgerald 1982; GRSLE). Styles changed quickly, so beads date sites: Ontario's Glass Bead Period 1 (1580–1600) has frit-core and small round turquoise beads, Period 2 (1600–1625/30) is dominated by white and blue oval and tubular beads, and Period 3 (1625/30–1650) by turquoise round and red beads, with red tubular Ia4 as its hallmark (Glencross et al. 2025). The key trait is a bead of European glass, drawn or wound, rather than native stone, shell or bone.

Size

Seed beads are under 2 mm in diameter; a wound light-blue Cook-type bead from Kijik, Alaska, measures 9 mm in diameter and 6.6 mm high (n = 1) (NPS Kijik).

Distribution

Throughout North America wherever European trade reached: the Great Lakes and Ontario, the Plains, the Pacific Northwest and Alaska (Fitzgerald 1982; Glencross et al. 2025; GRSLE; NPS Fort Vancouver; NPS Kijik).

Additional information

Look for glass: a glassy surface and, in drawn beads, a hole formed from an air bubble (NPS Kijik). Native stone, shell and bone beads are not glass. Named styles help date a find: Cornaline d'Aleppo, also called Hudson's Bay or white-heart beads, is a layered drawn bead with a brick-red layer over a lighter core (NPS Kijik), and red-on-white beads mark the 19th century on the Plains (GRSLE, citing Billeck 2008). Seed beads are rare in Alaska before 1840 (NPS Kijik). At Fort Vancouver, 97.6% of the beads are hot-tumbled drawn beads (NPS Fort Vancouver, after Ross 1976). On Neutral sites, glass beads rise from 8.9% of European goods at Christianson to 27.7% at Hamilton and 43.6% at Hood (Fitzgerald 1982). Karklins (2012) revised the Kidd and Kidd system for beads found in the Americas.

Similar types

Types that are easy to confuse with the Glass Trade Bead artifact.

Sources

  1. Glencross, Bonnie, James Conolly, and Gary Warrick. 2025. Ahatsistari as Ancient Carhagouha and the Dating of Seventeenth-Century Huron-Wendat Sites by Bayesian Modeling of Radiocarbon Dates and European Glass Trade Bead Chronologies. American Antiquity 90(4):661-682.cambridge.org (opens in a new tab)
  2. Fitzgerald, William R. 1982. A Refinement of Historic Neutral Chronologies: Evidence from Shaver Hill, Christianson and Dwyer. Ontario Archaeology 38:31-46.ontarioarchaeology.org (opens in a new tab)
  3. National Park Service, Fort Vancouver National Historic Site. 2024. Bead Types at Fort Vancouver.nps.gov (opens in a new tab)
  4. National Park Service. n.d. The Importance of Beads at Kijik. Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, Alaska.nps.gov (opens in a new tab)
  5. GRSLE Archaeology Project, Colorado State University. n.d. Glass Beads. GRSLE research data pages.grslearchaeology.org (opens in a new tab)
  6. Kidd, Kenneth E., and Martha A. Kidd. 1970. A Classification System for Glass Beads for the Use of Field Archaeologists. Canadian Historic Sites: Occasional Papers in Archaeology and History 1. National Historic Sites Service, Ottawa.surface.syr.edu (opens in a new tab)
  7. Karklins, Karlis. 2012. Guide to the Description and Classification of Glass Beads Found in the Americas. Beads: Journal of the Society of Bead Researchers 24.surface.syr.edu (opens in a new tab)

Back to all 1,069 types