New Member, New Inherited Pear Necklace!

I don't have the best camera...i have a pic yesterday of the clasp in the direct sunlight, and i just took a pic of the gold tongue of the clasp. I think there is a marking on 1 of the sides of the clasp but i can't see it too well...i will try and find a magnifying glass and look closer. Here are 2 more pics:

2qv6qeg.jpg


209myz4.jpg
 
Best would be to send it to GIA for a pearl report. That would tell you if they are cultured or natural. If they are natural and you have the report to prove it, you could sell them for a lot of money. The clasp looks to be genuine to me. That style is too much work for an imitation. The top could also be white gold and I agree that the date of the clasp is around 1930 to 1940. How fun to have a problem like yours!
 
What about the box indicates that it's from South America?

I may well be eating crow in the next few minutes, so be it, but no matter how much I work the first photo I can't see that the clasp in that first pic looks anything like the daylight photos of the clasp in subsequent photos. Not the correct profile, and not even a bit of subdued reflection from the worked metal?

I don't think the pearls look like the same pearls either. So, I'm ready to take my medicine, help me learn.
 
The first post says that the pearls are from eBay, but look like the inherited pearls. :)
 
The pearls i inherited, look very very similar to the ones in the e-bay auction link...only difference is between the 2 clasps, plus my necklace has more pearls. I only have an old camera, and i'm not very good at taking pictures...but the necklace and clasp in person looks so much nicer...the clasp has a real "bling" type of look to it that doesn't show well in the pictures. My father, and his family came from a well off background...my dad was from London England...and passed away in 2007 at the age of 83...i'm almost certain these were my grandmothers but i'm not sure.

If these pearls turned out to be natural, with a real clasp and diamonds would it really be worth a lot? I don't have any intentions on selling it as it was kept for me, but i am very intriqued to know if it could be a rare necklace, to find out the year/location it was made, and if possible an approximate value. If it turns out to be a valuable piece i don't want to leave it lying around in my house to get lost or stolen.
 
Here's another pic of the clasp in the direct bright sun from yesterday...you can see more of the "sparkle". It's weird that the camera doesn't pick up the diamonds well in the clasp, because under light you can clearly see them if you move the clasp side to side.

1dwsh.jpg
 
Pearls should not be stored in safe deposit boxes-- the humidity is too low and it damages them over time. They really should be worn occasionally-- it's good for the nacre. If the piece doesn't suit you as it is, it can be re-strung to a style that suits you more, and any leftover pearls can be used to make earrings and/or a bracelet. It should be restrung anyway as the silk is so old that breakage is a risk.

If they were natural pearls they would have greater value than cultured pearls, particularly as they seem quite round. (But, GemGeek, is there any reason to think they are natural?) The clasp would also add value if it tested as precious metals/ diamonds.

The only way to know the value of the strand is to get a proper appraisal. The pearls would be XRayed to see if there is a bead inside or not, and tests would be performed on the clasp as well. Appraisals cost money but you would certainly want to ascertain their value if you think you want to sell them, and even if you plan to keep them you may want an appraisal for insurance purposes.

It seems to me there is a problem with mailing them to the GIA (or anywhere else)-- how would the OP insure them properly for mailing if she doesn't know their value? And if the package were lost, how could she prove that they were worth what she'd insured them for, to file a claim with the carrier, without an appraisal?
 
Everything considered, the greatest likelihood (i.e., 99.9%) is that they are cultured pearls. If the clasp is original, it is consonant with good cultured pearls of the period. A triple strand of natural pearls, something beyond rare, would rank large diamonds and probably a significant emerald, given its South American origin.

The two things that pique my interest, as a natural pearl fanatic, are the size and appearance of some of the smaller pearls, and your mention of very fine drill holes. However, you also mentioned they are cold all the time. Coldness/heaviness is more characteristic of cultured pearls, as the central mother-of-pearl bead is denser than actual pearl nacre.

I first would try a good local resource, like Birks. Testing a triple strand at GIA is very expensive, and may not be necessary if someone with experience can look at them first (wish I lived closer, as I would be very curious to see them!). If you can't find someone, and it is true that EGL in Vancouver has a pearl machine now, you might try them. You can ask for a pregrading on just one of the strands, which would be the least expensive option. Another advantage would be not having to deal with international mail, customs forms, etc. Within the US, registered mail can be insured up to $25,000, but that is not available to Canada -- the limit is $44! Go figure!
 
Hi Blaire, I got that, but she identified the first picture as "My pearl necklace:". Then after an explanation she gives an eBay link to another necklace that also looks nothing like the necklace in subsequent daylight photos. Also suddenly! a box comes up, a wooden South American looking box after Allison brings up South American jewelrywork.

Arguably all could be explained away as a naive poster, and I'm not interested in being mean. Certainly i benefit from everyone's patience, as a perpetual student here! I think your advice to get it lab certified is the best thing to come out of this, except, I always like pictures of pretty pearls and clasps, no matter the provenance.

Arguably, I could admit to being sensitized to...whatever...after the recent 'appropriation' of Steve's photos. I don't want to make anyone feel unwelcome either, so I'll say I'm sorry if I did that here.

So maybe we can start over, she can post the ACTUAL necklace following the recommendations, and providing the shots Caitlin requested, Away from direct sunlight, etc...
 
Last edited:
For a full evaluation with x-ray, it could not be done on the spot.

As for the eBay link you cited -- that listing and supposed sale was a complete and total fraud. I know, because I queried the seller (long story!). The necklace shown is possibly cultured pearls, but more likely imitation pearls, and I believe someone was trying to pull a fast one, so to speak.

(Note that I am not speaking here of the first eBay link. I tried to use Reply with Quote, and it didn't work. I am referring to the most recent link posted above, of the phony $72,500 necklace.)
 
Thanks again everyone for all the responses and feedbacks. I had mentioned the wooden South African box, because coincidently the necklace and quite a few other items were in there also. I really have no knowledge in jewelry at all, so please excuse me for this. I am actually a collector of other things, just not jewelry. If i were to pay and get my necklace X-rayed next monday, and scan the X-ray and post it here would that help? I think i will also go to Birks as they are a very reputable jeweler in my city...plus i have a Birks ring also that i inherited that i would like to get looked at along with lots of other vintage gold jewelry.
 
Also, a good post for my learning, because it points up a flaw in the taking-a-picture instructions. She read "indirect daylight" as if it was a typo ie she thought I meant "in direct sunlight" as opposed to indirect = away from direct sunlight.

Good to finally figure out what was going wrong with the instructions; I wondered why some of the posters lately were choosing strong direct sunlight when we were asking for the opposite. The fact that more than one poster read it this way is significant. Time to fix it!
 
Last edited:
InheritedPearl, it won't be done the same day and you won't get a copy of the x-ray. The results will be communicated by phone or email and you'll get a number which can be used to order a certificate. I suggest you call first, ask for instructions and pricing, etc. But I think it is a good idea to go to Birks first with all the jewelry and see what you can find out. Good luck!
 
Thanks. Would a regular x-ray of the necklace be ok? On Monday my son and i have a dentist appointment, and my dentist for sure could take an x-ray of the necklace...i don't mind paying for that and posting the x-ray here if it could help someone identify it. I think this forum is awesome...i have been reading old posts and it's very very interesting.
 
Only sometimes will you get a readable result from a dental x-ray. Generally, the resolution is not fine enough; but it certainly wouldn't hurt to try if it's inexpensive. I just read an older post on this forum in which someone posted some good dental x-rays that clearly indicated cultured pearls. Sorry I did not keep track of it to be able to cite it here -- perhaps a moderator will know the one I mean?
 
Ok great, thanks Alison. I guess if they are only cultured pearls, no need to get them insured as they won't be worth all that much? I inherited also a lot of gold...i know it's a pearl forum but thought i'd share this pic anyways...the one in the middle is from Birks,i have lots more gold pieces that i will get looked at.

65dba0.jpg
 
It depends what your personal threshold for insurance would be. If they are nice cultured pearls -- and the clasp certainly has value -- maybe insure for $2,000? I think that is probably higher than market value, but lower than what would be considered replacement cost.
 
That pearl necklace on ebay is a sight I have never seen before. An ugly yellow necklace with only one photo! Then, a bid after four days. Money laundering. What else could be the reason for that sale? No one knowing is going to buy it with the story of being afraid of the GIA. They couldn't let a naif buy it, they would be so so liable, but presto, it makes a lot of money look earned through the sale of a piece of crap necklace. Money laundering, I tells ya.
 
Caitlin, that is an intriguing angle that never occurred to me. But in this case I think it was more like "aspiring scam artist gets in over head." After the phony (or cancelled) sale, the necklace was relisted a few times, with an ever-changing story about where the certificate was. Very amateur!
 
Back
Top