Could this be a trade ring?

[VThistorybuff]

Found this brass & glass ring in the yard of a 200 year old house in VT. The site has yielded items from as far back as the 1700s (eg, 1751 KGII halfpenny; pewter buttons & spoons) but mostly 1800s. The ring was about 10?-12? down. It?s crudely made. Nothing is symmetrical, not even the facets on the glass jewel. The patina seems quite advanced to me. The only other ring I?ve been able to find online that bears any similarity to mine is one that?s purported to be a 1600s fur trade ring from upstate NY (see pic). So my question is whether mine could also be a fur trade ring, even if from a later period. Thoughts?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[releventchair]

Anyone recognize this ring? Or have clues to it's origin?

It does not appear from the pictures to be an English hallmarked silver ring designed for the fur trade hayday.

Dutch? Spanish? Russian? French? Colonial America?

"Trade" is a generic term.
Is it from a trader or trading concerns inventory? Was it pointed at by someone on someone else's hand as being desired?
There were periods (or at least some) of isolation. When supplies/goods were stalled and stock ran short for some folks. War induced. And come winter and during storm seasons ships were not running so much. "Trade" goods were what could be gotten. Or what one had on hand. (On hand pun intended.)

I'm no authority. And my cheap ring finds are few , but all interesting. Still waiting on a humdinger... Not seeing a "trade" ring as in the context of the midwest and finer goods outside of Missionaries for example plainer rings. Not really "trade" rings though. Again , not seeing a "trade" silver type trade good.

The o.p.'s ring I don't recognize.
The split band near the mount sticks out. As does the notched mount itself.
Then there is the stone. Which I'd want figured out by a knowledgeable (a tough order) jeweler in hopes of a hint of origin and value. Not so much value in money , but of jewelry stones within a crude estimate of it's era.

Neat ring. How unique it may be is a fair question.
The mixed context of the recovery site complicates even guessing of who wore it first through last.
Part of the fun of relics is the possibilities.
That makes seeing them posted and discussed fun for those vicariously interested in relics recovered by others.

Don't let anyone upset you when thier experience doesn't jive with yours. Sample thier perspective. It may or may not fit.
ARRC has a jewelry eye based on lots of eyeballing. I can take or leave that. Regardless of how I think he presents his opinion. It still has value.
When someone nails an i.d. , (and it happens here enough) we celebrate.
That takes multiple opinions and ideas to get to sometimes.
With multiple contributions through networking.
Don't sell the process short on the biggest puzzles....Input matters.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Muddyhandz]

Man, my old camera is crappy! Tried to show the facets but is tough with the old technology.

Here's the red ochre example.....



and also there's a George III glass trade ring from the same time frame that is known as a trade ring and is described in the fur trade journal's inventories of trade goods.



The center stone is set the same way as the faceted ones.

 

[VThistorybuff]

Anyone recognize this ring? Or have clues to it's origin?

It does not appear from the pictures to be an English hallmarked silver ring designed for the fur trade hayday.

Dutch? Spanish? Russian? French? Colonial America?

"Trade" is a generic term.
Is it from a trader or trading concerns inventory? Was it pointed at by someone on someone else's hand as being desired?
There were periods (or at least some) of isolation. When supplies/goods were stalled and stock ran short for some folks. War induced. And come winter and during storm seasons ships were not running so much. "Trade" goods were what could be gotten. Or what one had on hand. (On hand pun intended.)

I'm no authority. And my cheap ring finds are few , but all interesting. Still waiting on a humdinger... Not seeing a "trade" ring as in the context of the midwest and finer goods outside of Missionaries for example plainer rings. Not really "trade" rings though. Again , not seeing a "trade" silver type trade good.

The o.p.'s ring I don't recognize.
The split band near the mount sticks out. As does the notched mount itself.
Then there is the stone. Which I'd want figured out by a knowledgeable (a tough order) jeweler in hopes of a hint of origin and value. Not so much value in money , but of jewelry stones within a crude estimate of it's era.

Neat ring. How unique it may be is a fair question.
The mixed context of the recovery site complicates even guessing of who wore it first through last.
Part of the fun of relics is the possibilities.
That makes seeing them posted and discussed fun for those vicariously interested in relics recovered by others.

Don't let anyone upset you when thier experience doesn't jive with yours. Sample thier perspective. It may or may not fit.
ARRC has a jewelry eye based on lots of eyeballing. I can take or leave that. Regardless of how I think he presents his opinion. It still has value.
When someone nails an i.d. , (and it happens here enough) we celebrate.
That takes multiple opinions and ideas to get to sometimes.
With multiple contributions through networking.
Don't sell the process short on the biggest puzzles....Input matters.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. My question about it being a trade ring was based on its similarities to the one I found online, which is the only ring I was able to find that resembled mine in a lot of ways. It may or may not be a trade ring. If it is, it was much later, toward the end of the era. The stone is glass, seemingly faceted by hand (you can see the polish/grind marks and the facets are not symmetrical). The split shoulders are typical of the late 1700s/early 1800s, as is the raised design on the bezel & band. I really have shown it to curators at major museums (I have no qualms reaching out to these folks) and the consensus so far is pre-1830, which makes sense given where it was found. Beyond that, it's still a mystery. As for AARC, my suspicion is that he knows it's not a gumball ring but just wanted to get a rise. Mission accomplished.

 

[VThistorybuff]

Man, my old camera is crappy! Tried to show the facets but is tough with the old technology.

Here's the red ochre example.....

View attachment 1940849

and also there's a George III glass trade ring from the same time frame that is known as a trade ring and is described in the fur trade journal's inventories of trade goods.

View attachment 1940850

The center stone is set the same way as the faceted ones.

These look like the examples I've generally seen online. The "Iroquois" ring I posted as a comparison seems to be different from most others, with the prongs & forked band.

 

[Hunter1805]

I have the exact ring with the small stones missing just like yours. It is identical !!! Found here in NY at a fur trade site.