any one a jewelry expert ?

[dagfoto]

as the story goes that this is suppose to be a "treasure item" from a undisclosed wreck ..

Can Anyone put a date on this .. labled as 14kt , yet tests as 18Kt, no marks, minor old repairs, not real high grade stones.

Any Idea of a value (about 17grams)

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Mackaydon]

What does the back look like?

 

[divewrecks]

If I found something like that I would be sure to photographically document it in the "as found" condition prior cleaning. This would about be the only viable proof one would have to differentiate a true wreck recovery and not just a piece of colonial era styled jewelry.

Regarding value, I know there was at least one auction catalog that focused specifically on Spanish colonial jewelrythat would be good to refer to. I believe it was from Christie's or one of the other big auction houses.

Stan

 

[Mackaydon]

Maybe the tester tested only the part repaired (14k).
Other than unsupportd verbal hype ('shipwreck artifact'), what can the seller provide to authenticate the piece (prove its provenance)?
Don....

 

[ilyes1113]

i think that no antique gold jewelry of 14 k .
most of gold jewelry up 18k +

 

[EE THr]

I don't have much of an idea of any narrow date range of the style or craftsmanship, but it could also be recently made, and intended to look old. You really need to know where this came from and how it was obtained.

I doubt that it is a modern fake, for the following reasons. Very few people with the skill to create an original wax form, especially with the intricacies that this piece has, also have the skill necessary to alloy and successfully pour a casting like this. And amongst those who do, fewer still have the skill to cut and polish the stones. And if more than one person contributed to it's making, they would have to split any profit from it, also.

Considering the time it would take to create this piece, I doubt it would be worth someone's time, considering what it might be sold for, because without a matrix of solid provenance it would not be an item that a high-end collector would pay top price for.

But if it matched other pieces of proven origin, that would increase it's possible worth, even without a documented chain of ownership, or certification of treasure recovery. But if it does closely match other known pieces, either as a duplicate or part of a set, or a known craftsman or company's particular style, then the possibility of a forgery comes back into play, also, as it's possible worth goes up.

Just like any piece of jewelry, however, buyers generally demand to know where it came from, and thus prove if it was obtained legally, as it could be their total loss if it were not.

As it stands, it really looks like it could be a very old piece, with the odd shaped stones, and their full bezel mountings, and the unusual method of mounting the pearls. The four missing pearls, and the signs of repair further add to the consideration of antiquity.

But without some kind of supporting provenance, I would think that it's value would be too uncertain for a skilled person, or more likely persons, to create it as a fake. If they are that good, they can easily make their own fortune legitimately, with far less risk.

A piece such as this, but with unknown source, might not be good to have around. Who knows, the government might even claim it's rightfully theirs! With no provenance, how could you deny it?

 

[cuzcosquirrel]

To reproduce the four arms of this design would require either a modern wax molding process or a process of cutting out four patterns onto narrow gauge gold and then cutting them out, bending them and using a chisel and files to put in the detail.

There are three kinds of stones. rubies, emeralds, pearls. pearls usually come up bad looking after wreck submersion, either disappearing or getting eaten away so they are just little white balls. Rubies would have to have come through India or Siam to Manilla, then to Mexico. The emeralds would have had to come from Columbia or Brazil. This kind of limits the possibility of where it could have been made.

The stones appear to have been pressed into soft wax forms before casting, then mounted later. They could have also been built up after casting from alloyed gold wire in a heavy brazing process, but this seems to have not been the case.

Gold brazing was used to affix the terminals for the pearls on the piece in places. Some of these have broken off. This may be why you are getting a reading of 14kt in some places and 18kt in others.

The style looks a bit similar to at least two things I have seen from the Conception wreck jewelry found at Saipan. That was around 1640, I think. The heavy mass at the middle is similar to some of the heavy mass jewelry I have seen from several wrecks.

The Spanish were not incredibly keen of symmetry in relation to where they inserted stones into a piece. it seemed they cut and polished stones to match the holes that existed in the form they created and cast. Most stones were cold hammered into their settings using small tools and a setting crown of soft, higher grade gold.

The polish is too well done. Most gold jewelry produced and submerged has a kind of grainyness to it in places. It may be repolished, but that I think brings down its appeal and authenticness.

It would take about 8k in tools to make that, and the gold content and stones would run a couple hundred dollars. The techniques used require a very high knowledge base in a wide variety of jewelry areas. The old brazing would require what is known as the "lamp technique," or modern gas equipment. You don't usually see this in old pieces, but you do in newer ones. Why better quality emeralds were not used in unusual. Surely in an old piece, they would have been readily available.

That it is 14kt is unusual also. Most jewelry of a complex nature was above 18kt. People who existed below the tier of barons, earls, dukes, govenors, and royal military officers had jewely, but it was more modest and not as well made as the other stuff. The Spanish colonial period had two centuries of expansive use of ornamental jewelry by both men and women. Could this piece have gotten out there? It seems doubtful.

My friend's sister is an art historian and she has talked to me about this subject several times. She said, the stuff that survived was either somehow unusual, or the best that was produced. All the rest wore out, got melted down and the materials reused. Lost stuff tends to fill in the gaps. That, and looking at old paintings.

 

[divewrecks]

According to Kathleen Deagan (author of "Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500-1800") this is the definitive reference you should probably look at to research this piece:

Jewels in Spain: 1500-1800, Priscilla E. Muller
http://www.amazon.com/Jewels-Spain-1500-1800-Priscilla-Muller/dp/0875351212

Deagan's book is excellent by the way, one of my favorite books....
http://www.amazon.com/Portable-Possessions-Artifacts-Caribbean-1500-1800/dp/158834035X

Stan

 

[cuzcosquirrel]

Sounds good. This is the kind of thing I am referring to in my above post.

http://www.britishmuseum.org/explor...t_image.aspx?image=ps069740.jpg&retpage=20666

The thing in the middle of this Girona wreck jewelry is about as close as I have seen to what you have there.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_PkwoL2H7ldo/S1zY-Hmde7I/AAAAAAAABGs/bLFfT_MEan4/s400/armada_gal_girona.jpg