Pearl of Allah, Fact; Pearl of Lao Tsu, Fiction

[Caitlin]

Here is another interested party who claims part ownership in the pearl
PETER HOFFMAN
owner, Pearl of Allah

Certified as the World's Largest Pearl,
replicas of the PEARL have been on display at major world museums.

the PEARL was discovered May 7, 1934 inside a tridacna clam by a muslim tribe in the Philippines. The tribal chief renamed it the pearl of god or the PEARL of ALLAH.

This is documented with photos in Natural History, November 1939, the magazine of the American Museum of Natural History.

 

[Caitlin]

This article has a little more info:

Ocean Watch
Susan Scott


Giant pearl does not have precious past

ON Nov. 15, 2002, I wrote a column about pearls that included two sentences about one particular pearl: "The largest pearl ever found came from a Philippine giant clam. Called the pearl of Allah, it measures 9 inches across, weighs nearly 14 pounds and resembles a small brain." I got so much e-mail about that pearl, I later wrote an entire column about it (March 21, 2003).
To this day, mail concerning the pearl of Allah keeps rolling in from all over the world. Subjects range from secrets about the pearl's powers, to criminal investigations regarding its sale, to conspiracy theories linking the pearl with al-Qaida.
People are fascinated with this football-size gem.
I use the word gem loosely. As defined in the dictionary, a gem is "a precious stone cut and polished for ornament." This pearl has not been cut or polished, and its bumpy oblong shape might look interesting but it's not what I would call ornamental.
The e-mail that got me back on this subject came last week from a reader who sent a link to an Associated Press story about the famous pearl. This Colorado Springs, Colo., report adds a sordid chapter to the pearl's history.
Joe Bonicelli, a Colorado Springs man described as a bar owner, bought a share of the famous pearl sometime in the past. How much of a share was not reported, but even if the portion was small, Joe must have been running a pretty successful bar. The pearl is supposedly valued at $60 million to $75 million.
When Joe died in 1998, his daughter from his second marriage inherited the estate, including the pearl share. Children from Joe's first marriage, however, sued the estate when they learned that Joe had hired a barber to shoot and kill his first wife, their mother. (The barber succeeded and is now in jail.)
Joe's first children won the case, clearing the way to sell the pearl.
Good luck. The pearl has its own Web site, www.pearlofpeace.com, published by Peter Hoffman. This Beverly Hills jeweler writes that he owns the pearl, and mentions no shareholders. According to Hoffman's site, the pearl is priceless, but he'd part with it for $75 million.
Who, I wondered, would pay that kind of money for a lumpy nugget of nacre (mother-of-pearl)? The plot thickens -- and sickens.
Another man, Victor Barbish, claims to own 66 percent of the pearl. In 1999, he says, individuals from "the bin Laden group" tried to buy the pearl for Osama to give as a gift to Saddam Hussein. They offered $60 million. Barbish refused and reported the incident to the FBI, who kept it a secret.
The Web site reporting this terrorist link to the pearl of Allah is not a reliable one, but it illustrates the wide range of stories about the pearl that continue to circulate.
Since its discovery in 1934, this lopsided lump has generated a long list of goofy tales. But it does have one legitimate claim to fame: its size. The pearl of Allah is the largest pearl ever found.
That means it came from a giant among giants. Giant clams are the largest of all mollusks, and the one that laid down this pearl must have been big and beautiful.
To me, as remarkable as a 14-pound pearl is the marine animal that made it. I'd rather have the clamshell.

Marine science writer Susan Scott can be reached at www.susanscott.net.

 

[knotty panda]

I meant a discussion of the pros and cons of Wiki and carbon-dating which really aren't pearl related would be better elsewhere and not taking up precious forum space here.

Welp, I had to work all day so I didn't really have time to pursue this subject of the "pearl" that is, but it's really on my mind. "I've grown accustomed to it's face" LOL. Yeah, I know, really creepy.

I've been in touch with Mr. Barbish through Pearl for Peace and several of the newspapers in the Denver area. Yes, Mr. Barbish purchased half ownership of the Pearl at the probate sale with Mr. Hoffman. I think I had mentioned that in a prior post, maybe not. I have not attempted to contact Mr. Hoffman. To my knowledge, he is not a member of the Pearl for Peace Organization.

There's a couple of things which might break in the next week to 10 days and I'm on top of those. But yes, Caitlin, I'd love to see this in a thread all by itself. I hate that it detracts from all the other wonderful pearls!

Hey, Ash! Extra butter! Sea Salt! YUM, YUM!

 

[knotty panda]

Caitlin: You asked how the Pearl for Peace Organization relates to the Pearl itself. The organization supports law enforcement groups, police, etc. Mr. Barbish's brother, I believe, was employed by the FBI, so they have close family ties to law enforcement. He coupled that with the need to have the pearl working for something more valuable than it's intrinsic value.
_______________________________________
Ok, now I'm confusing my owners. It was Cobb's brother who was the FBI guy.

Barbish met, get this, J. Edgar Hoover and Al Capone at Joe's Stone Crabs in Miami having a friendly little dining experience together. (Believe that?) It was then he decided to become a G-man, only things didn't work out that way. So the foundation was set up to support law enforcement which is in line with the amulet's purpose of 3-guys living harmoniously together.

I read a few days that the amulet was carved from jade. Can you imagine? Pearl-plated Jade! Be still my heart!

 

[Caitlin]

I don't get it. They are going tro sell the pearl and use the money for law enforcement? Or is it the McGuffin to attract paid membership? If so, Kari's first and only post is suspiciously like a soft sell on membership.

How does the pearl itself fit into this. It appears that other heirs want it sold, so it is tied up in the courts.

I spent hours last night reading all the references in the wiki article and I went about 10 pages deep into Google. I also googled for news articles. Every single article uses one of the other articles for its reference material, or the article from wiki. there simply is no primary source material except a copy of an appraisal.

I hve not seen an iota of evidence for making the jump from the found "pearl of Allah" to the so-called "lost pearl of Lao Tse" The appraisal only mentions where it was found and its weight, yet it was privy to other appraisals and the lab report.

The foundation's article clearly calls the connection to China a legend and there isn't any evidence of any rubbings of this pearl. The foundation's article has no references whatsoever and the references at the wiki site are pathetic. They cite the Pearl guide Forum, for proof of its weight. The foundation needs to reference any and all claims made in the article. As the article is, it never states that any of it is fact.

Among the articles claiming the pearl was in process as a gift from BinLaden to Sadam Hussian is unprovable. The man Barbish cited as initiating the deal, denied it to the article's author. So that really shouldn't count as proof he did something he said he didn't do, yet this article is given as a reference. Apparently there is a suit over that, too.

In school I was taught, "Give credit where credit is due" That means you must use valid references in a factual article.

BTW, who has the inside dope on Barbish? The wiki article contained information not available anywhere else about Barbish's feelings and planned actions. It had to have been written by someone very close to Barbish as there are no references about where that material came from either. Nowhere in print, I'll wager.

Honestly, I think all reerences to the legend of Lao Tse should be removed from ALL copy. It is unprovable and the way it is written up, credulous people and children would think it is "real"

BTW knotty, I am glad you are checking things out re this story.

 

[jshepherd]

What do you think about the Strack report on the pearl, page 304 and 305. She does speak of Barbish and Hoffman. She also mentions it was transferred to LA in 1990 for sale. She makes reference to its sale and lists Robert Wan as a possible buyer.

I wonder what the real truth is...? I am going to have the opportunity to meet Wan in August. If it is at his museum I am sure he will show it to us.

 

[Caitlin]

Hi Jeremy
Much of the story since it was first transferred to Cobb in 1939 is consistent with other reports. She does not mention the carbon dating of it however. (How does one carbon date a pearl? It was never living. And if you did, how could you do it without drilling it? If it has been growing for all that time, what part of the pearl do you check? Not all of it is the same age.)

Even Strack refers to the "legend" of Laotse. In this version she says the Lee family settled in the Phillipines and the clam with pearl was lost in the Ming dynasty. This is yet another version. (underlining mine)

Even the official (but completely undocumented) webpage of the foundation says it was lost being transported on a ship.

The wiki article says wars were fought over it in China, so the Lee family transferred it to Palowan. If wars were fought for possession of this pearl, maybe you can find a reference to it in China.


One last thing: No one else has said Robert wan has it and it BELONGs to his museum!. Nor that Wan/museum wants to sell it to Brunei!! This little part of the tale was omitted. Does Barbish even possess/own the real thing anymore? Why is Robert Wan not mentioned in its chain of ownership since 1939?

I would really like to see more documents on the wiki article. There is one from Colorado Springs on there and it refers to others andto the carbon dating. Why not post all that and get it over with?

 

[Caitlin]

One more thing
The Strack article mentions a 2004 date, so she has updated the article as of 2004. That includes Robert Wan.

Ps Thanks for reminding me of her book. It sits an arms length away.......

BTW she mentions Barbish but says he claimed 50% ownership but had already pawned his share to (Strack's word) to joseph Bonicelli. The pearl also seems to have been offerred as collateral to yet another loan to Hoffman. Finally the court confiscated it from a Colorado bank All this was around 1990 when in May, the pearl appears to have been sold, and later, Robert Wan had it

Ok Who can update us? Who has the pearl? Is the foundation in memory of the pearl?

 

[knotty panda]

I don't get it. They are going tro sell the pearl and use the money for law enforcement? Or is it the McGuffin to attract paid membership? If so, Kari's first and only post is suspiciously like a soft sell on membership.

Response: Caitlin, the Appeal Court ruling upheld the trial court. The trial court’s verdict in the wrongful death suit awarded Plaintiff’s approx. $32M from the Estate of Bonicelli. What normally occurs when an award is made from an estate, is that the assets are sold off. As Mr. Barbish (he and his shareholders representing 50% ownership, of which the Bonicelli estate is a shareholder, but to what extent, I don’t know) is not a party to the wrongful death suit, nor is Mr. Hoffman (he and his shareholders representing 50% ownership), to my understanding, only the actual shares owned by Bonicelli can be ordered sold by the Colorado court.

How does the pearl itself fit into this. It appears that other heirs want it sold, so it is tied up in the courts.

Response: Shares owned will be sold. (See above response.)

I spent hours last night reading all the references in the wiki article and I went about 10 pages deep into Google. I also googled for news articles. Every single article uses one of the other articles for its reference material, or the article from wiki. there simply is no primary source material except a copy of an appraisal.

Response: You are not going to find primary source material by googling. If you are looking for primary source material, you need to improve your research methods. The internet is, at best, a tertiary level source where you will find copies of information.

I hve not seen an iota of evidence for making the jump from the found "pearl of Allah" to the so-called "lost pearl of Lao Tse" The appraisal only mentions where it was found and its weight, yet it was privy to other appraisals and the lab report.

The foundation's article clearly calls the connection to China a legend and there isn't any evidence of any rubbings of this pearl. The foundation's article has no references whatsoever and the references at the wiki site are pathetic. They cite the Pearl guide Forum, for proof of its weight. The foundation needs to reference any and all claims made in the article. As the article is, it never states that any of it is fact.

Response: According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of “Legend” is:

“1 a: a story coming down from the past; especially : one popularly regarded as historical although not verifiable”

Of note is the words myth and/or fable are absent from this primary definition. The word “myth” is not used until we reach the tertiary definition level. Therefore, a legend by its very definition is one that is not verifiable, but, indeed, is popularly regarded as historical.

Is Merriam-Webster an unreliable source in your opinion?

And, again, the internet, by and large, will not provide references. An excellent example is we all purchased Strack’s book. The entire book is not published on the internet for your reference.

Among the articles claiming the pearl was in process as a gift from BinLaden to Sadam Hussian is unprovable. The man Barbish cited as initiating the deal, denied it to the article's author. So that really shouldn't count as proof he did something he said he didn't do, yet this article is given as a reference. Apparently there is a suit over that, too.

Response: I have no knowledge of that.

In school I was taught, "Give credit where credit is due" That means you must use valid references in a factual article.

Response: Again, perhaps you should improve your research methods and not rely on a source which is not primary.

BTW, who has the inside dope on Barbish? The wiki article contained information not available anywhere else about Barbish's feelings and planned actions. It had to have been written by someone very close to Barbish as there are no references about where that material came from either. Nowhere in print, I'll wager.

Response: I would think there are public records available to you, should you wish to research the pearl owners. A suggestion would be to begin with the incorporation papers of the foundations. These are public records and will give you a place to start.

 

[knotty panda]

Jeremy: How very cool and so timely to this discussion! From what I've seen in my research, the Pearl is located in Colorado Springs in a bank vault. I do think this is a McGuffin. Why in Colorado, the home of a minority shareholder and not within reaching distance of a majority holder? Unless, of course, it was presented at trial ("Exhibit ZZ" the offending Pearl!), which I am trying desparately to uncover. Yes, I have considered it's location a McGuffin.

 

[Valeria101]

I don't get it. They are going to sell the pearl and use the money for law enforcement? Or is it the McGuffin to attract paid membership? If so, Kari's first and only post is suspiciously like a soft sell on membership.
...
I spent hours last night reading all the references in the wiki article and I went about 10 pages deep into Google. I also googled for news articles. Every single article uses one of the other articles for its reference material, or the article from wiki. there simply is no primary source material except a copy of an appraisal.

The move to publicize largely the story, make web-noise (that was a heroic effort, Caitlin!) reminds me of red pearls... or make that red herring, if you wish - still a marine animal, red in the cheeks ) The form and content of this communication does not quite tally with the story. High BS factor...IMO (just IHMO)!

Now, I'm in not much hurry to find out what if any reality lies behind. It is such a fugly, scary thing. Definitely in need of heavy romance, if any pearl is. Wonder how many large Tridacna concretions are being weathered into sand overall... Yiks!

Also IHMO, the Lao Tse legend is THE most important piece of textual evidence here. Beacause we are watching a modern legend being born

2c


..........

Taking a break from this: remember that toothie pearl that was delayed from auction because of a royal funeral? It's story involved much of the who 's who of the 16th century East-meets-West. Now, that story I tend to believe more, and would SO wish to see their documentation.

 

[Caitlin]

Ok I'll jump to the chase. Wiki articles are supposed to be properly referenced. If this one were, I would not need to make this a life quest.

I have enough contradictory information to really make a hash of that wiki article when I edit it. And unless I get some good background on the "legend", out it goes ------ into another article not so intimately associated with the story of the pearl since Palowan.

UNsubstantiated stories about Barbish's current intent have no business in there either, unless he can document them.

I was given permission to put out a challenge on this story, here. I intend to email Strack to ask her what/who her sources were, especially about the Robert Wan part. She is a meticulous scholar and she must believe that story and/or have evidence of it. So we need substantial evidence the sale did not go through, that Robert Wan did not turn up with it and put it in his museum.

For good measure I wonder if Barbish does have possesion of it and how he got it in the face of the 3 way sale. What did he buy it for? There are so many other intimate details in the accounts, this was quite a coup and I am surprised Barbish got ownership out of that sale and didn't tell the story.

Straightening out this story and separating fact from fancy and finding any evidence of the legend anywhere--after all "wars were fought over the pearl"- there must be some history in China... the upshot being it should help Babish clean up his website and put out more doucuments han that the appraisal in the wiki article, the only actual document- or rather a photo of it.....I've seen yet. Done.

I would be so happy to get your input . Maybe you would like to write the article? Maybe you would help me write it?

 

[Caitlin]

Hi Valeria
The Arco Vally Pearl's beginnings might be somewhat legendary but It has been quite well tracked over the centuries. I believe it also was examined and maybe even auctioned by major houses, sources I tend to give credance to myself. Sorry this is in italics, it wouldn't quit them....


Yes, I sense quite a bit of the legendary red pearls in this story...

 

[Caitlin]

Of note is the words myth and/or fable are absent from this primary definition. The word ?myth? is not used until we reach the tertiary definition level. Therefore, a legend by its very definition is one that is not verifiable, but, indeed, is popularly regarded as historical.

I was secure in my use of "legend". You must be a crackerjack legal person. You are an expert hairsplitter! I mean that as a compliment.

I do accept Merriam-Webster, but here is the full banana:

Legend
1 a: a story coming down from the past; especially : one popularly regarded as historical although not verifiable b: a body of such stories <a place in the legend of the frontier> c: a popular myth of recent origin d: a person or thing that inspires legends e: the subject of a legend <its violence was legend even in its own time ? William Broyles Jr.>2 a: an inscription or title on an object (as a coin) b: caption 2b c: an explanatory list of the symbols on a map or chart

I take issue with "Popularly" I don?t think this legend qualifies as "popular" and won?t unless it stays in the wiki.. I do approve of ?recently?......

(Actually Websters leaves out a few definitions and ?legend? makes it 3rd in the following- ranking with myth and fable on the same level.)


Here is my expert witness:
Legend.
1. That which is appointed to be read; especially, a chronicle or register of the lives of saints, formerly read at matins, and in the refectories of religious houses.
2. A story respecting saints; especially, one of a marvelous nature. --Addison.
3. Any wonderful story coming down from the past, but not verifiable by historical record; a myth; a fable.


And in this legend all that glorious deed Read, whilst you arm you. --Fairfax.


4. An inscription, motto, or title, esp. one surrounding the field in a medal or coin, or placed upon an heraldic shield or beneath an engraving or illustration.
Dictionary .net


In fact under ?Tools? in my Word program is ?language? then thesaurus, where "legend" is interchangeable with myth, fable and FAIRY TALE



Seriously, between the two of us, we should be able to get at the facts.

 

[knotty panda]

Precisely, and I did abbreviate the definition. (Boss looking over shoulder wondering what the heck?) But when it's all said and done, what is the value of the pearl? It IS the legend. Without the legend, all you have is a clam pearl and they have no marketable value. Ok, so someone said it's the face of Allah. Then someone else said, "Well, I'll be dang-dogged it is Allah! Saw Allah just the other day going to the grocery and that there Pearl looks just like him!" Without the stories, all you have is a really big clam pearl with no nacre and no value other than it's oddity. The truly sad part is, a husband put a hit out on his wife. A family has been torn apart and the pain will be with them forever. That's some BAAAAAAAD mojo!

 

[knotty panda]

Ok, now that I've caught up on my reading ... yes, Caitlin, my dear, I do have an idea of how we can get to the bottom of it. And Valeria hit the nail on the head as to why this is gnawing at me. I've known this for some time, but didn't want to admit it out loud. This is absolutely, positively, a piece of history in the making, whatever the outcome. Not only that, but now that it is in the courts we have the opportunity to have access to that primary source documentation.

 

[karipearls]

Kari, Can you update us?

Kari, Can you update us?

Hi Caitlin,

Kari here. You are quite the researcher!

Ok Kari, Can you update us? Who has the pearl? Is the foundation in memory of the pearl?

I don't know much about the pearl or the foundation. They contacted me asking to exchange website links which I was happy to do.

According to the Pearl for Peace administrator, Barbish owns 100% of the pearl.

I think it is a fascinating "pearl".....but then I just like pearls!

As for my last post being my "first and only post"...yes it was my first post...gotta start somewhere, right? I'm a little short on the illusive substance called "time". In addition to creating my pearl website, I am a mother of 7, and wife to a busy pastor/farmer....there are not many minutes left over for forums.

I hope you can solve the pearl of allah mystery for us....we'll all be very happy then.

Kari

 

[knotty panda]

Well, Kari, gotta tell ya, love your website. I've been looking for a freshwater pearl ring for sometime and I had it down to 3 places to buy from. A couple of weeks ago, I knocked one of them off the list because I love your inventory.

Now, to the pearl. Far be it from me to doubt Mr. Barbish's claim of 100% ownership, however, several factors would have fallen into place regarding Mr. Bonicelli's ownership in the pearl by this time which would have precluded the court's ruling. Court's do not tend to grant sale of items without some sort of verification of ownership. Just my thoughts on the subject and just one more question added to the mounting pile of questions.

Does this sound familiar to anyone? "I'm the baby's daddy!"

 

[Caitlin]

Hi Kari!

You just added a piece to the puzzle. They are actively seeking other sites to pepper with their propaganda! They have a PR person to seed the internet with their (urban) legend. Did you know you are cited as a main reference in the wiki article? The wiki article directs people to your article on the pearl! That is not acceptable, I am pretty sure.

In anycase, thanks for checking in again. Your website is a known over here and we want to be friends. Welcome. Sorry if it was rough.

Was that a coincidence that you just showed up here just as we are really getting into the debate? If so, wow.

 

[Caitlin]

Hi knotty
LOL!

Well that's it for me tonight. I am so happy we are all on the same page.

One last thought. I think the fact it is the largest pearl, even if a clam pearl, is OK without the hype. It doesn't need the hype, it has a true crime story hooked to it, far better trade goods I would think! A lousy reputation never hurt the Hope diamond!

With all our friends in China, I hope there will be some who can say whether or not they ever heard about the Laotse part of the legend or what wars were fought for it. Anything. And that goes for the Lop Noor pearls too!

Hey Stephen Bloom, where are you? Get a load of this story! The making of an urban legend as it develops and is sold by the " Big Boy's" PR dept!