10 gram fatty

[1491]

Rang up as 12-25 on the Minelab eTrac in beach mud. Using the Coiltek 10 x 5 coil, plenty deep, and balances well with eTrac. Negative tide exposed some 'new' real estate. 😄 No karat marks, but has inscription that includes the Roman numeral III, in addition to owner's name. Anyone know what a ' III 17 / 12 ' character string represents, date-wise?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Jose The Goon]

"1491", not sure of this, but possibly your ring is a pre-1906 wedding band that was made before Karat marks were required. Possibly 18K. (you should have it tested). Also, I see what appears to be 11/72 which could be the month and year of a wedding date etc.(November, 1872)
Congrats on your hefty gold find !! Nice ring !!

 

[1491]

"1491", not sure of this, but possibly your ring is a pre-1906 wedding band that was made before Karat marks were required. Possibly 18K. (you should have it tested). Also, I see what appears to be 11/72 which could be the month and year of a wedding date etc.(November, 1872)
Congrats on your hefty gold find !! Nice ring !!

Thanks for the reply! The 'date' portion reads ' III 17 / 12 ' (the wife and husband's names precede this and the engraving is stylistically, 'old'). Was wondering if lack of a jewelers mark might also indicate a non U.S. piece. Interesting that white gold apparently did not become commercially available until 1912. I will have it tested, seems on light side for platinum too.

 

[robertk]

Maybe the "III" is just a crudely done "11/" ? Which would make the date 11/17/72?

 

[1491]

Maybe the "III" is just a crudely done "11/" ? Which would make the date 11/17/72?

robertk, I added an additional photo of the date to the OP.

 

[mike b]

St. Patrics Day. March 17, 72 ?

 

[mike b]

Looking at it expanded, I see the "7" in 17 has a line across the vertical part We did that in the military so it wouldn't be confused with a #1. Now I see the "7" in 72 isn't crossed, it's hard for me to imagine an engraver doing one but not the other. So, the "72' might be a "12" not "72"

 

[robertk]

robertk, I added an additional photo of the date to the OP.

Ah. That's much clearer, and definitely a "III", not an "11/".

 

[1491]

It's a date format I haven't seen used before. The owner's name engraving is fairly ornate and not what I would call 'modern'.

 

[billb]

Congratulations on your success
Thanks for posting