Ring I Found Got Exponentially Cooler!

[Diggum]

Trying to figure out the age of a ring that I found, I posted this thread: https://metaldetectingforum.com/index.php?threads/found-a-unique-ring.307521/#post-3518353

Looking at one of the pictures, it looked to me like there was a very tiny hinge on it, so I pulled it out and took some close ups. Sure enough, looks like a tiny hinge, and a thumbnick on the opposite side. I sucked it up and popped it open, and SURPRISE!! Tiny daguerreotype! It looks like a woman, upon close inspection. HOLY CRAP!! I'm over the moon with this! That puts the ring post-1837, but not sure how far past that. What an awesome ring!! I'm going to run by the museum in the town I found it, and see if they have any insights for me.

 

[HungryGhost]

That is an amazing ring!!!

 

[cellrdwellr]

Wow now THAT is a over the top find, once in a lifetime even. Congrats man!!! Is it gold or silver? Looks gold but could just be tarnished silver I suppose. Any idea what these marks say on the front part?

 

[cellrdwellr]

Oh and don't think just because it registered as a quarter it's not gold, I've had large gold rings register pretty high on the machine, so it does happen...

 

[hoser]

Oh now THAT is over-the-top cool. That ring went from sweet to SWEET! I would be standing here beside myself.

 

[Diggum]

Wow now THAT is a over the top find, once in a lifetime even. Congrats man!!! Is it gold or silver? Looks gold but could just be tarnished silver I suppose. Any idea what these marks say on the front part?
View attachment 595978

cellrdwellr, thank you, man! AND GREAT EYE!!! I was so focused on the lovely lady, I missed anything on the flip side. I'm loathe to clean the inside further (I'm not sure what damage my sonic cleaner may have already caused), but I'll see what I can do to clean up the top and see if there is further information. Sadly, the ring has no hallmark or other stampings on it, but maybe these markings you noted will tell the tale!

Oh and don't think just because it registered as a quarter it's not gold, I've had large gold rings register pretty high on the machine, so it does happen...

I am pretty sure that it's electrum. That would explain why it has light staining like silver would, looks silver in sunlight, and has a goldish hue in other light. This ring is a size 6 and weighs 7.8 grams. Definitely thinking electrum.

Oh now THAT is over-the-top cool. That ring went from sweet to SWEET! I would be standing here beside myself.

Thank you, hoser! Totally agree!!



Including a picture (negative image from the ring made positive by one of the chaps on Facebook) of the lovely woman who inspired this beautiful ring 150+ yearss ago...

 

[MasonDixonMding]

Wow! Wow! Very cool love it.

 

[stetam]

That is once in a lifetime epic find. Congrats!

Steve

 

[Diggum]

Wow! Wow! Very cool love it.

Thank you, MDM!!

That is once in a lifetime epic find. Congrats!

Steve

I hope not, but I kind of have to agree, Steve!

This pic is for cellrdwellr:

 

[BobOso]

very nice, I agree, could very well be electrum. I've found a couple of nuggets that are electrum, kind of a different look, depending who sees them will say copper, gold- they have the weight and I'll take them. Congrats on the great find.

 

[SeabeeRon]

Amazing find! This is one of those recoveries that "if only it could tell its story"!! Who was this person, what happen, the questions are endless.

Congrats on one of the best finds I have seen posted here or anywhere!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Great followup update post Jon. I wonder if there was a period of time when other such rings were made. I mean, this *certainly* can't be a unique phenomenon, right ? Like I wonder if there was a period of time when this was vogue to do. Kind of like the fad of "love tokens" tends to have a date range of when people did that. Or like "mood rings" were a fad of the mid 1970s, and so forth. So too might there be a period of time when these tended to be sported by folk.

Also the photo style "daguerrotype" (that's what yours is, right ?) : Aren't these limited to a certain time frame of evolution of photography ? If so, then presumably your ring should be in that date range.

As if it's not an interesting enough ring for your own boasting right , it would be especially over the top if you actually found out who the gal was. Presumably she's someone local to your area. But who knows. Because go figure : You have a giant influx of east coast arrivals there in your part of CA during the gold rush. So it might simply have arrived from back east. Thus the odds are pretty slim that you'd be able to identify her. But who knows ? If you have local history books for your area, perhaps you can spot her in some vintage photograph there. And then that would be so cool if you could hunt down to see if any descendants are still around.

 

[Kansashunter]

Oh heck yeah! Very cool!

 

[Rock Jock]

Outstanding find! Congratulations and an attaboy are in order! Somehow this doesn't look like a man's ring. Too delicate and almost an Egyptian themed motif.

 

[TheFrood]

That is an amazing ring in and of itself. Being a MD find is pure gravy...

 

[Diggum]

Great followup update post Jon. I wonder if there was a period of time when other such rings were made. I mean, this *certainly* can't be a unique phenomenon, right ? Like I wonder if there was a period of time when this was vogue to do. Kind of like the fad of "love tokens" tends to have a date range of when people did that. Or like "mood rings" were a fad of the mid 1970s, and so forth. So too might there be a period of time when these tended to be sported by folk.

Also the photo style "daguerrotype" (that's what yours is, right ?) : Aren't these limited to a certain time frame of evolution of photography ? If so, then presumably your ring should be in that date range.

As if it's not an interesting enough ring for your own boasting right , it would be especially over the top if you actually found out who the gal was. Presumably she's someone local to your area. But who knows. Because go figure : You have a giant influx of east coast arrivals there in your part of CA during the gold rush. So it might simply have arrived from back east. Thus the odds are pretty slim that you'd be able to identify her. But who knows ? If you have local history books for your area, perhaps you can spot her in some vintage photograph there. And then that would be so cool if you could hunt down to see if any descendants are still around.

Hey, Tom, agree on the timeframe for daguerrotype photos. They were first created in 1937 and would have had a limited life as early photographers moved on to glass negative and eventually celluloid. I joined a Reddit photography forum yesterday to try to get info, because per my reading this would not be a typical daguerrotype since the normal process creates a directe to metal positive, and this is clearly a negative. I was hoping someone on that photography forum could give me some background on what exactly this may be.

I'm also still waiting for a call from the museum/historical society to figure out who this woman was, and thus figure out who may have been the original owner of the ring. I have my suspicions, but need their help to confirm.

If I figure out more of this ring's history, I'll add to this thread.

 

[Diggum]

Amazing find! This is one of those recoveries that "if only it could tell its story"!! Who was this person, what happen, the questions are endless.

Congrats on one of the best finds I have seen posted here or anywhere!

Thank you, Ron! That's saying a lot, coming from you! I recall that guy who found an intact laudnumm vial, silver holder, and chain from the 1800s that he found on a hillside, and always wanted to find something that cool. I now think that I did! I feel amazingly lucky and blessed to have found this! I'm hoping to be able to loan it to the local museum and tie it to the town's history.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... They were first created in 1937 ........

I think you mean 1837, eh ?

But as you say, moot point since this was some photographic method to be used for just-this-purpose. And since there's no shortage of photography buffs out there, and no shortage of history on the history of photography in general, that : Someone should have something to say about this.

As far as donating it to a museum "on loan", be aware that not too many museums these days accept the terms of "on loan". Because there were horror stories of persons (or surviving family kin, etc...) barging into museums saying "give me back my item now". And then workers must stop everything they're doing, open cabinets, etc.... Or heaven forbid it was in storage somewhere and the museum or city can't find something that someone "loaned" 20 yrs. earlier. The lawyers get called, etc....

So most all museums now will only take donations. Not loans. Also the stipulation that some people used to try that : "Must be displayed". All such stipulations are avoided by museums, lest it turn into a situation where the general public is, in essence, dictating what will be the floor layout. As if the museum themselves can't make changes, decisions, etc....

It would have to be something over the top ridiculous to accept any constrictive terms like "on loan". Eg.: If you could prove that that was the wife of the founder of the richest mine gold strike in your district, or ....... you get the picture.

 

[Diggum]

I think you mean 1837, eh ?

But as you say, moot point since this was some photographic method to be used for just-this-purpose. And since there's no shortage of photography buffs out there, and no shortage of history on the history of photography in general, that : Someone should have something to say about this.

As far as donating it to a museum "on loan", be aware that not too many museums these days accept the terms of "on loan". Because there were horror stories of persons (or surviving family kin, etc...) barging into museums saying "give me back my item now". And then workers must stop everything they're doing, open cabinets, etc.... Or heaven forbid it was in storage somewhere and the museum or city can't find something that someone "loaned" 20 yrs. earlier. The lawyers get called, etc....

So most all museums now will only take donations. Not loans. Also the stipulation that some people used to try that : "Must be displayed". All such stipulations are avoided by museums, lest it turn into a situation where the general public is, in essence, dictating what will be the floor layout. As if the museum themselves can't make changes, decisions, etc....

It would have to be something over the top ridiculous to accept any constrictive terms like "on loan". Eg.: If you could prove that that was the wife of the founder of the richest mine gold strike in your district, or ....... you get the picture.

Yup, Freudian slip! Meant 1837.

Thanks for the info on the museum loans. Makes perfectly good sense. I'm happy to keep my best find! :-)

 

[scoundrel]

That’s about as cool as it gets. Nice find.