Hmmm...dangerously in love...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bogus
  • Start date Start date
Hi Bogus,

I do not know this vendor, however, the design of the piece looks very skillfully done (possibly early Cartier) and the pearl, if original and not a replacement, should be an important natural if the size is at all measured correctly. The color and luster somewhat look like pinctada mazatlanica to me but it may just as well be a pinctada maxima or margaritifera or a freshwater pearl from Wisconsin. The asking price is far from a steal but a fair opening bid.

Zeide
 
Thanks, Zeide!:)

If it were natural, would that bump up the value of the piece? If so, could you guess how much?

It seems to me if the difference were a lot, the vendor would have sent it out for a lab report....

I've wanted an antique jewel featuring a natural pearl for a long time...but I'm not sure I'm ready to spend this much!!!:p

Bogus
 
Wow!

Now... I am not surprised at the lack of lab report, pearls don't come with them as often as other natural stones. I don't quite know the reason, but suspect that identification for natural pearls is less straight forward and hence the lab reports less appreciated. Could be dead wrong in that.

The quote does sound high, but then, surely the seller knows this one is going to attract attention; the pearl would have been tempting even without the large pendant addition. The dating makes much of the argument for the price and the natural ID of the pearl, I wish I was sure of it just by looking at a little picture, but that is not the case - I just don't know enough to place any date on the unusual design. The details of the setting and id of the pearl could be organized - even the complete 'paranoia package' is cheap compared to the price of this one!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Ana,

I think the style is earlier than 1930. It looks more like just before WWI to me. It was probably one of the very early platinum and diamond jewelry pieces.

Zeide
 
Zeide Erskine said:
Hi Ana,

I think the style is earlier than 1930. It looks more like just before WWI to me. It was probably one of the very early platinum and diamond jewelry pieces.

Zeide


Right... the lace brings it down a couple of decades, IMO (like this one) . The pictures are not clear enough to see much detail, but as it is, the fan shaped pendant seems to be made in one piece w/o assembly, something I would associate with new examples of the style.

I hesitated allot before posting this because I am no expert and don't want to detract from the striking impression of the piece... If anything, I would have brought the same question to a professional for advice, if a talk with the seller and better view of the pendant didn't sort things as usual.

Anyway, what am I saying? Perhaps the simple fact that this came as an Ebay listing instead of being paired with in-kind in a more selective auction brought all the questions.
 
I am a total novice when it comes to antique jewellery and identifying the maker but didn't shops like Cartier put a makers mark on their pieces to identify where it was made?

DFrey
 
Hallmarks... yes, but not always and many delicate designs (like that one) simply do not allow much room for a stamp and do not have one.


A teaser... and some color...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are maker's marks included among 'Hallmarks'? (matter of language)

Even without legally enforced hallmarks for metal content, there could have been maker's marks on fine jewelry well before WWII. But that's beyond the point here, I guess, since the seller does not claim any such signature on the pendant.
 
The makers mark would be part of the hallmark and would identify the shop or individual who made the piece. The hallmark would also include a claim as to the quality of the metal in the piece ie. 18k, 750, 14k, 585. In some countries the hallmark would also include other information such as where the pieces had been hallmarked.

I think I am correct in my use of the terms.



Dfrey
 
Back
Top