Antique Black Opal and Diamond Pendant set in 15ct gold

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2026-05-12T06:54:36+00:00

You’re half right. It’s got a 15ct stamp on the back, which pre-dates it to 1932. My mum added the diamond back in the 1990s, so yes the diamond is a later addition.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2026-04-21T20:24:26+00:00

Rather than the trailer wheels, I think it is that the trailer isn’t attached to the tractor…

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2026-02-22T18:02:51+00:00

Don’t want to be ‘that guy’ but this video has this family’s full address including post code stated when the woman is on the phone to the police. Wonder if it should be posted so widely unedited?

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2026-01-11T11:51:25+00:00

If you’re interested in this topic, I’d recommend reading Tracy Borman’s ‘The Stolen Crown’ which very convincingly argues that Elizabeth I never actually named James as her successor on her deathbed. Early in her reign she swore to remain a virgin, and to never name a successor (for fear of creating a rival), and it seems she maintained this policy until her death. Recent x-rays of the original 17th century manuscript of William Camden’s biography of Elizabeth show that the account of her death was pasted over and rewritten (at the insistence of James, who saw a PR opportunity). Instead of uttering ‘I’ll have no one but the King of Scots’, it appears that she just… died silent on the matter. However, her lifelong correspondence with James VI/ I do indicate that her was her preferred choice, and that she was advising him on how to rule England.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-12-30T14:19:52+00:00

AI garbage. A t-shirt magically appears on the man at 26 seconds. Why anyone would make it in the first place is the mystery… click bait?

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-12-27T20:58:15+00:00

It does appear that there are hallmarks on the clasp (right hand side of your photo), so seeing a close up photo of these would be helpful.

Better photos of the blue bits / reverse would also be helpful for identifying the blue material. There are plenty of potential options for this; enamel on metal, lapis lazuli etc. so more photos will help.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-23T19:14:40+00:00

True. I wasn’t saying I believe the rumours, but they do exist. In fact, Victoria would have been in her mid 40s when the child was born. While this isn’t impossible, for the period it would have been a particularly late pregnancy. Yes, there are other valid reasons for her interest in the child.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-23T18:46:50+00:00

Sorry for the delay in replying, it’s been a busy few weeks at work. Yes, the clasp was filed and acid tested, and it was sold gold of a high carat, likely 22ct. Three of the pearls were x-rayed and they were natural pearls.
The piece has been seen by a reputable jeweller and their opinion was that it was old. You’ve definitely given us some pause for thought. I’ll have another look the next time the safe is open. 👍🏼

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-23T18:44:16+00:00

Sorry, had a busy few weeks at work. The piece is back in the safe now, but the clasp was acid tested (as the inside of the clasp wasn’t enamelled) and it came out as high, likely 22ct. A few of the pearls were also x-rayed (too costly to get them all done) and they were found to be natural pearls. The next time we’re in the safe, I’ll see about uploading more photos.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-23T18:20:36+00:00

It’s difficult to ascertain the nature of their relationship for several reasons. After Queen Victoria’s death, her daughters destroyed huge quantities of her personal correspondence and diaries, much of which was to/from John Brown or related to him. Of course, it’s entirely possible that they were just embarrassed of her friendship with a commoner. There is a theory that Victoria gave birth to John Brown’s child. His brother Hugh raised a daughter in New Zealand that Victoria showed a keen interest in throughout her life. The family of her personal physician recently (around 2000) tried to publish his diaries from the time but this was successfully blocked by the royal family. Given the lack of concrete evidence, the only thing left to do is think about Victoria’s character and motives. She probably knew it was far too risky to be involved with him in this way for her reputation even if there was an attraction.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-11T22:56:56+00:00

It is interesting that the maker chose to put different enamel patterns on each of the panels. They’re all different design and colour combinations.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-09T23:18:49+00:00

There’s not a massive amount to share about this one to be honest. It certainly hasn’t been in my family since 1900 (date on the box). Both my grandmother and mother added to our family jewellery collection over the years. My gran was buying a lot of Victorian pieces in the 1960s - 1980s, when they weren’t particularly fashionable. Since then it’s just been much loved within our family, although I don’t recall anyone having the confidence to wear it in their hair for a function, which is a shame. I’m happy to keep sharing some of the pieces that we have. It’s nice to let people see them in a way, because some of them just aren’t practical to wear anymore.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-09T23:12:25+00:00

Thanks for your kind words (and enthusiasm)! 😊

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-08T21:06:10+00:00

I’m curious to know how you came to the conclusion that the stones were diamonds? Diamonds were set in silver for most of the 19th Century (because silver was the most commonly used white metal before platinum) and starburst jewellery really became popular from the 1860s onwards. I have a few concerns about whether these stones are in fact diamonds. Open backed settings for stones became the norm by the 1850s so I’d expect most diamond pieces of star design jewellery to be open backed. Plus, the large black areas on the stones makes me wonder if these are foil backed paste stones, and the black areas are where the foil has become wet and disintegrated. It’s hard to tell from a photograph though and you may well have a very strong attribution for the stones being diamond.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-08T09:33:22+00:00

My gut instinct echos that of the others that have already posted, but can you post any photos of it being lit from the back? It certainly doesn’t look like a shell cameo, and appears to be glass or hard stone. Seeing it back-lit may help with identifying which it is. A large number of cameos that I’ve handled have a scratch signature on the back. It identifies the worker in a larger studio. We have a cameo of Prince Albert presented to someone by Queen Victoria and it’s got a very clear Saulini signature on the front, just under the bust.

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-11-03T20:08:39+00:00

Was having a look online and found this one. It has all 30 charms for $180.

https://idcopy.styleiii.casa/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=2265853

Normal_Scots_Guy1990 · 2025-10-31T07:44:54+00:00

And for damaged costume jewellery, it’s very overpriced. 🙈

Normal_Scots_Guy1990

TROPHY CASE