Posted 10 years ago
katherines…
(247 items)
Don't remember how I acquired this ring. It looks old and sort of bronze-y, but there is a very worn marking inside, barely readable, 14K. So maybe that is a ruby and those little diamonds? It's my favorite ring, I like the style and look of it. Even most of the contemporary rings I own sort of look like this ring. Don't know anything about jewelry, could someone perhaps clue me in as to period/era? Does being an older ring add more value to a piece of jewelry? Thank you for any information, and thanks for looking!
Thanks for the love, nutsabotas6. :)
Thanks for the love, Jewels, and racer4four. :)
Thanks for the love, upstatenycollector. :)
Will you like this ring less if you find out that it isn't worth much? I hope that proceeding forward that you will love that ring, no matter what. Someone put thought and time into creating it. Keep that in mind, even if the dollar value doesn't seem to match.
(I'm not comfortable even guessing a value based on the little I know, but it's something every jewelry collector needs to consider.) Some of the most precious pieces I own would barely buy me a meal at a nice restaurant at auction, but to me they are invaluable. For some, the only importance of any piece of jewelry that they own is what the item could earn at resale.
At first glance, it appears to be a (based on your description and the picture) a rather large emerald cut ruby (or garnet - important to know which, in terms of value), with 4 tiny round cut diamonds, set in a 14K gold ring.
Now, to answer some of your questions. a) Age doesn't always increase the value of jewelry. Buy what you like, antiques/jewelry are only worth what someone will pay. I've been at auctions where the buyer paid less than scrap value. If you're considering jewelry for investment, proceed with caution.
b) In terms of this ring, it is a bit curious, isn't it? The setting (the metal part, especially the prongs) seem to be crudely done. By this, I mean that I could make this setting rather easily (I can think of 2 ways to do this, both rather straight forward), so the odds of it coming from a great designer are probably slim.
Don't be discouraged, though, that doesn't mean it's not a good/interesting ring. It just means that the setting is not overly worked. This could be a matter of choice or a lack of availability of modern processes/tools.
c) A note of caution with large red stones, natural rubies are prone to inclusions (natural flaws in the stone). As a result, lab-created rubies are a relatively inexpensive alternative to natural (virtually) inclusion-free rubies and should be questioned if a large solid red stone (assumed to be a ruby, rather than colored glass/crystal) looks a little "too perfect".
If it is a natural stone, then the 4Cs apply: color, clarity, cut, carats. For more on this, you may enjoy reading this: http://www.gia.edu/ruby-quality-factor [This site also has an interesting video on lead glass-filled rubies that are a new concept/concern to me.]
On the flipside, if it is a garnet, here is information on that http://www.gia.edu/garnet-description
The value of a ring can be heavily dependent on the metal, heavily dependent on the gems, or heavily dependent on the history/designer. If it's heavily dependent on the metal, than the piece is worth about the value of scrap.
If, on the other hand it is heavily dependent on the gem, then it would be important to get a gemologist's valuation on the stone. (It is ok to think of the value of the metal and of the stone separately and eventually separate them...unless the value is dependent on the history/designer. Do not deconstruct a piece with value attributed to its history or designer.)
But, in this case, you seem to really like the ring as is (priceless), so I think you are more interested in historic/design issues than strict monetary value. If you thinking of insuring it, then it would be a good idea to visit a jeweler who can test the metal (sometimes things marked 14K aren't 14K, sometimes they are gold plated, gold filled, or something completely different).
Jewelers can help you with the stone, too, to help you determine what you really have. (Some charge a fee for appraisal to do this, but some only charge an appraisal fee if you want official documentation regarding your ring.)
I'm sorry, though I've seen rings like this in the past, I could not find information about an era/country of origin that is most associated with this style.
junkcollector, I could not have asked for a better analysis than what you have just provided, and I am again overwhelmed and very grateful for the information. Yes, it is my favorite ring, the style is different and unique, and yes it does look as if it were made by hand, so to speak. Not perfect. The stone inside doesn't look perfect either, if by perfect you mean clear. And yes I wondered if the marking was a fake since the gold does look more bronze than gold. Of course I would like it to be valuable, but that's as a matter of curiosity since I don't plan to sell it. An interesting ring like this one is a keeper. :)
Again, thank you very much indeed, junkcollector, very thankful for your help.
It's a beautiful ring Katherine :).... Very interesting "deco" architectural design . Have to say junkcollector gave us all an amazing amount of info too !
Great ring... I love the style... And I love rubies.
Thanks for the love, PhilDavidAlexanderMorris, aghcollect, sklo42, mikelv85, patSea, CindB, and DrFluffy.
Mike, yes, it does have an Art Deco feel, doesn't it? I kept searching for one similar on Art Deco sites, then tried Egyptian Revival, no joy anywhere. It's unique! :)
Cindy, I am learning a lot on this site, and certainly learned a lot today from junkcollector! :)
Thank you Dr Fluffy, it is a lovely ruby. Thank you, you inspired me to post mine with the pictures of your beautiful and interesting rings. :)
Thanks to all of you for looking!
I would wear this :)
Thanks, melaniej, for the love and your comment, glad you like it. :)
Well the friendly neighborhood jeweler says the ring is made of copper and the ruby is synthetic. Still a most interesting ring, and will stay with me as my favorite. :)
Thanks for the love, SEAN68. :)
I love this ring! I also enjoied reading Junkcollecors input. Enjoy wearing it, I know I would!
Thanks for the love, Trey, and sarahoff. :)
MayanM, thank you, yes, junkcollector really did a masterful lecture with this ring. I don't wear it, but I love looking at it! Thanks again for looking. :)
Thanks for the love, antiquerose, Agram.m, and Candi-Cam39. :)
thanks junk for the explanation, you said what I would have in probably as many paragraphs!
I think one thie though. It's most likely crude because of it's age moreso than being of low value.
However like I state on mine, there is no use even posting to get a value or a type of metal because it is impossible as we all know from a photo.
So if its a family piece I would be tempted to get it valued.
Or wait till Antiques Roadshow come to town! lol
Lovely item katherine!
Hello AnneLanders, and thank you for your comments on this ring. This is such an oddball, and I have a fondness for oddballs, lol! :)
I like it a lot. It looks sort of medieval. Very interesting ring.
Thanks for the love, freiheit, Manikin, AnneLanders, melaniej, Vladimir, aura, Caperkid, Efesgirl, and Lamplover78. :)
jeneric, sorry for coming to your comment so late, greatly appreciated. :)