family jewels AGAIN!
- Thread starter wigwag
- Start date
I can see your photos thanks to Ookoo - and have no idea how to post them on this site, either, since I don't use flicker but I'm sure someone knows! There must be separate code to imageshare.
The French belt buckle - front and back - looks like "jet" in the photo but since you say it's deep blue it's probably rhinestones and most likely C. 1930s. Very pretty!
The second piece - the Industria Argentina bracelet is wonderful - C. 1940's. It looks like two tone plated metal over base metal but it could also be brass and silver plate - very machine age. Love it!
Not sure about the next silver tone bracelet. My first reaction is '50's but would like to see the clasp and the back and I still might not be able to date it!
The next item - the opal and ruby bracelet is very well done but the setting looks more "costume" to me than real so I "think" it's Victorian Revival and that the stones are simulated opals, etc. But without handling it's difficult to know if the stones are real and what the metal is. A costume bracelet could still be found in an antique store but if you have any thoughts that it's real take it to a jeweler and ask.
The stretch bracelet with the patent number is confusing because it really looks like a Victorian Revival bracelet - C. late 1930's early '40's but you said it says 1983 - which doesn't make sense - could it say 1933?
The glass leaves necklace could be anywhere from late '30's to newish but my guess is C. 1930's.
The molded plastic dress clip looks like celluloid - probably just pre- WWII - C. 1930 or right after C. 1950. They look earlier to me than later.
Not sure about the two pins and
The dress clips are C. 1930's.
If someone knows how to post the photos to this thread it wil make it easier for everyone to see them!
The French belt buckle - front and back - looks like "jet" in the photo but since you say it's deep blue it's probably rhinestones and most likely C. 1930s. Very pretty!
The second piece - the Industria Argentina bracelet is wonderful - C. 1940's. It looks like two tone plated metal over base metal but it could also be brass and silver plate - very machine age. Love it!
Not sure about the next silver tone bracelet. My first reaction is '50's but would like to see the clasp and the back and I still might not be able to date it!
The next item - the opal and ruby bracelet is very well done but the setting looks more "costume" to me than real so I "think" it's Victorian Revival and that the stones are simulated opals, etc. But without handling it's difficult to know if the stones are real and what the metal is. A costume bracelet could still be found in an antique store but if you have any thoughts that it's real take it to a jeweler and ask.
The stretch bracelet with the patent number is confusing because it really looks like a Victorian Revival bracelet - C. late 1930's early '40's but you said it says 1983 - which doesn't make sense - could it say 1933?
The glass leaves necklace could be anywhere from late '30's to newish but my guess is C. 1930's.
The molded plastic dress clip looks like celluloid - probably just pre- WWII - C. 1930 or right after C. 1950. They look earlier to me than later.
Not sure about the two pins and
The dress clips are C. 1930's.
If someone knows how to post the photos to this thread it wil make it easier for everyone to see them!
Thanks, Linn. That's really great. Yes, isn't that Modernist bracelet wonderful? I did have a photo of the clasp of that silver bracelet but, of course it got lost in the shuffle. Will try to upload it to my Flickr set. My belief was that it was older, as it had been my great-aunt's, and she was pretty well past buying jewelry by the 50's. But who knows? The photo doesn't do it justice.
You could be right about the pretty gold bracelet, and that would be a bit of a laugh (sort of). When my sisters and I were dividing up my mom's stuff after she died, one sister got the gigantic opal and diamond ring, the other got the ten pound gold charm bracelet and I got that piece! But I do have a valuation receipt from the 70's that put it at around 700 bucks.
I'm sorry to confuse you about the next bracelet. The patent is 1883, not 1983! June 19th.
I have another, and better, bracelet in the same style, with the same patent, but I lent it to a friend... this one has been badly repaired.
Thanks for all your info. Much appreciated!
Meredith
You could be right about the pretty gold bracelet, and that would be a bit of a laugh (sort of). When my sisters and I were dividing up my mom's stuff after she died, one sister got the gigantic opal and diamond ring, the other got the ten pound gold charm bracelet and I got that piece! But I do have a valuation receipt from the 70's that put it at around 700 bucks.
I'm sorry to confuse you about the next bracelet. The patent is 1883, not 1983! June 19th.
I have another, and better, bracelet in the same style, with the same patent, but I lent it to a friend... this one has been badly repaired.
Thanks for all your info. Much appreciated!
Meredith
cmpollack
VFG Member
What lovely pieces! That expansion bracelet is wonderful... 
I'd be surprised if stones worth $700 were put in a base metal setting? My first impression, like Linn, was that it was a costume piece. Maybe have a jeweler take a look at that one?
On the two pins with turquoise colored stones: Maybe they aren't from the same time period, with the long more bar-shaped one being earlier? Though the pin stem appears to be broken off, it looks it was on a tube hinge; which would suggest late 19th or early 20th century to me...
I'd be surprised if stones worth $700 were put in a base metal setting? My first impression, like Linn, was that it was a costume piece. Maybe have a jeweler take a look at that one?
On the two pins with turquoise colored stones: Maybe they aren't from the same time period, with the long more bar-shaped one being earlier? Though the pin stem appears to be broken off, it looks it was on a tube hinge; which would suggest late 19th or early 20th century to me...
Jonathan
VFG Member
THe first pair of buckles are either marcasite or cut steel and are shoe buckles c. 1918-1923
The last set of dress clips have a pat. number mark on the back but I can't quite read it either. If you could read it then you could look it up on the patent number site and get a positive 'not earlier than' date.
The last set of dress clips have a pat. number mark on the back but I can't quite read it either. If you could read it then you could look it up on the patent number site and get a positive 'not earlier than' date.
Maybe the opals in the bracelet are triplets? I used to have a ring with an opal triplet, and the metal was gold-plated silver. You could see it was a triplet if you looked at it closely from the side - from the top it looked like any opal. But it was a lot less expensive than a "full" opal (and all I could afford 15 years ago).
Karin
Karin
Very intriguing, Midge, thanks. I had a look with the magnifying glass and while the central setting opals look "real", the two on the outside look like they might be "doublets". They're very flat.
Jonathan, thanks to you, too. I tried several different guesses on the patent but couldn't come up with anything right. I DID come up with a merry-go-round! We're kind of neighbours, by the way... I'm in Toronto. UPDATE. Found it. Patent 1932.
Linn, I meant to tell you that I have the exact same retro Coro "duette" that you show in your Workshop IV. It's also been lent to a friend... a number of pieces still to photograph. The clasp of the silver bracelet is now among my Flickr pics.
Jonathan, thanks to you, too. I tried several different guesses on the patent but couldn't come up with anything right. I DID come up with a merry-go-round! We're kind of neighbours, by the way... I'm in Toronto. UPDATE. Found it. Patent 1932.
Linn, I meant to tell you that I have the exact same retro Coro "duette" that you show in your Workshop IV. It's also been lent to a friend... a number of pieces still to photograph. The clasp of the silver bracelet is now among my Flickr pics.
The silver bracelet is great - I am not sure how to date it. Do you know anything about when the person who owned it got it or where? Obviously with the 1883 patent that bracelet is Victorian not Victorian Revival. I was thrown off by the "19"
Sorry about the misinformation on the buckles - I didn't look at the backs closely enough and thought they were belt buckles and I was confused by their being blue but looking at them again and at the backs I can see that they are cut steel. I'm confident that Jonathan's dating is correct.
You proabably should take the bracelet with the opal or faux opal stones to a jeweler to find out what you have.
I hope someone will come along and explain how to post photos from flicker!
Sorry about the misinformation on the buckles - I didn't look at the backs closely enough and thought they were belt buckles and I was confused by their being blue but looking at them again and at the backs I can see that they are cut steel. I'm confident that Jonathan's dating is correct.
You proabably should take the bracelet with the opal or faux opal stones to a jeweler to find out what you have.
I hope someone will come along and explain how to post photos from flicker!
Linn, thanks. I'm so glad you got a better look at the silver bracelet. As I think I said, it's completely unmarked. I'm pretty sure it belonged to the same great-aunt who owned most of the other stuff (though the Victorian bracelet(s) probably came from her mother). My great aunt was born in 1890 and died in the 60's but she'd pretty well done with buying things by the early 50's. And that's all I know, except that she was pretty fashionable.