Interesting old necklace. Any info appreciated!

[jewelerman]

my bad...we need R.Sherwood....sorry for the mis print!

 

[Ellen]

Wow, glitterata, have you missed your calling??!

Thank you so much for the info!

I may have another piece to the puzzle. I went to take a picture of it clasped, and when I blew it up, I saw something different on the end with the date, only it wasn''t the date! I can''t believe I missed this before, but at any rate, I wonder now if the date is when it was patented? Just a guess, I''m sure you will know better.

I also took a pic with the chain next to a drinking straw. I was trying to help show the actual size of the chain, not sure how much help it will be.

You asked if I had anything else, there''s another thread I did in the CS section, which I''ll give you the link to. I also have a couple Cameo pieces in my bank box that I''d love to show you sometime. I forgot they were in there when I got all this stuff out of my moms box.

I''m also going to repost the ring with the possible OEC I put in aj''s thread in RT, to see if I can get my question answered. If you can tell me anything about it, that would be great!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/hey-sharon-canuk-gal-i-know-you-like-them-big.93965/

Chain with straw.

 

[Ellen]

Clasp, with info. Says PAT 187

 

[glitterata]

Okay, that helps. That''s definitely a patent date on that clasp--Dec. 2nd, 1871. The 1 is hard to see because the enamel has worn off, but it''s there. So that gives us a date for that part of the necklace, at least, a bit earlier than Jewelerman and I thought. But the necklace itself could be from later, if it''s made up of earlier parts matched together.

Also, the clasp is definitely the sort of thing that they used for watch chains. Very typical for the end of the chain where you would clip on the watch.

The size makes me think these were a lady''s watch chain parts. I bet they also put them together in other ways to make up, for example, bracelets, or other styles of necklace. The wonderful doves would have been used on brooches (there''s even an entire brooch in your necklace), earrings, and so on. Watchcases, as Jewelerman said. I''m now convinced by Jewelerman''s argument that this was made up at the time out of multiuse parts.

Wonderful necklace, Ellen! Thanks for showing it.

I''m going to go look at your other thread now.

 

[glitterata]

By the way, if you have tons and tons of time on your hands, you can probably find the actual patent for that clasp by searching the US patent department website. You would have to go through the patents filed on that date one by one, but eventually you would find it. I think Google also has a patent search now--you could try searching that way, too.

If you find the patent, that will tell you who invented the clasp. It won''t necessarily tell you who manufactured the piece or when, since the clasp could have been invented some time earlier, by someone else. But it''s a place to start.

You could also try looking for post-1871 jewelry catalogs and see if you can find any advertizing items made from those parts.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/3/2008 10:44:39 AM
Author: glitterata
Wonderful necklace, Ellen! Thanks for showing it.

I''m going to go look at your other thread now.

Thanks glitter, and again, thank you for all the great info!

 

[jewelerman]

Date: 9/3/2008 10:44:39 AM
Author: glitterata
Okay, that helps. That''s definitely a patent date on that clasp--Dec. 2nd, 1871. The 1 is hard to see because the enamel has worn off, but it''s there. So that gives us a date for that part of the necklace, at least, a bit earlier than Jewelerman and I thought. But the necklace itself could be from later, if it''s made up of earlier parts matched together.

Also, the clasp is definitely the sort of thing that they used for watch chains. Very typical for the end of the chain where you would clip on the watch.

The size makes me think these were a lady''s watch chain parts. I bet they also put them together in other ways to make up, for example, bracelets, or other styles of necklace. The wonderful doves would have been used on brooches (there''s even an entire brooch in your necklace), earrings, and so on. Watchcases, as Jewelerman said. I''m now convinced by Jewelerman''s argument that this was made up at the time out of multiuse parts.

Wonderful necklace, Ellen! Thanks for showing it.

I''m going to go look at your other thread now.

glitterata,
I believe we are still correct on our date of the necklace.heres why...2 reasons...this tube shaped clasp is still in use even today...the jewelry company could have been ordering or manufacturing this style clasp for years before it was placed on the end of this necklace and the patent date would stay the same...also i recently saw a watch case on www.watchuseek in the vintage watch forum that was dated 1899 with almost this exact style and coloring...the parent may also be from a missing clasp part as would be used to hook the chain to the top of the pocket watch...now new mystery...what are the small round ball on the back of the brooch for?ELLEN...THANKS FOR POSTING THIS FUN PIECE!Now on to the cameos...

 

[glitterata]

Date: 9/3/2008 1:57:35 PM
Author: jewelerman

Date: 9/3/2008 10:44:39 AM

Author: glitterata

Okay, that helps. That''s definitely a patent date on that clasp--Dec. 2nd, 1871. The 1 is hard to see because the enamel has worn off, but it''s there. So that gives us a date for that part of the necklace, at least, a bit earlier than Jewelerman and I thought. But the necklace itself could be from later, if it''s made up of earlier parts matched together.


Also, the clasp is definitely the sort of thing that they used for watch chains. Very typical for the end of the chain where you would clip on the watch.


The size makes me think these were a lady''s watch chain parts. I bet they also put them together in other ways to make up, for example, bracelets, or other styles of necklace. The wonderful doves would have been used on brooches (there''s even an entire brooch in your necklace), earrings, and so on. Watchcases, as Jewelerman said. I''m now convinced by Jewelerman''s argument that this was made up at the time out of multiuse parts.


Wonderful necklace, Ellen! Thanks for showing it.


I''m going to go look at your other thread now.

glitterata,

I believe we are still correct on our date of the necklace.heres why...2 reasons...this tube shaped clasp is still in use even today...the jewelry company could have been ordering or manufacturing this style clasp for years before it was placed on the end of this necklace and the patent date would stay the same...also i recently saw a watch case on www.watchuseek in the vintage watch forum that was dated 1899 with almost this exact style and coloring...the parent may also be from a missing clasp part as would be used to hook the chain to the top of the pocket watch...now new mystery...what are the small round ball on the back of the brooch for?ELLEN...THANKS FOR POSTING THIS FUN PIECE!Now on to the cameos...

I agree, Jewelerman. I expressed myself badly. 1871 is the earliest this necklace could have been made, but it certainly could have been made later!

In fact, I used that sort of clasp just the other day to make myself a watch fob necklace. I attached five clasps to an old men''s watch chain, and I hang various different fobs and lockets from my collection on them. Maybe I''ll take a picture.

Speaking of which, Ellen, would you indulge me with a neck shot of that lovely necklace?

 

[jewelerman]

Date: 9/3/2008 2:16:16 PM
Author: glitterata

Date: 9/3/2008 1:57:35 PM
Author: jewelerman

Date: 9/3/2008 10:44:39 AM

Author: glitterata

Okay, that helps. That''s definitely a patent date on that clasp--Dec. 2nd, 1871. The 1 is hard to see because the enamel has worn off, but it''s there. So that gives us a date for that part of the necklace, at least, a bit earlier than Jewelerman and I thought. But the necklace itself could be from later, if it''s made up of earlier parts matched together.


Also, the clasp is definitely the sort of thing that they used for watch chains. Very typical for the end of the chain where you would clip on the watch.


The size makes me think these were a lady''s watch chain parts. I bet they also put them together in other ways to make up, for example, bracelets, or other styles of necklace. The wonderful doves would have been used on brooches (there''s even an entire brooch in your necklace), earrings, and so on. Watchcases, as Jewelerman said. I''m now convinced by Jewelerman''s argument that this was made up at the time out of multiuse parts.


Wonderful necklace, Ellen! Thanks for showing it.


I''m going to go look at your other thread now.

glitterata,

I believe we are still correct on our date of the necklace.heres why...2 reasons...this tube shaped clasp is still in use even today...the jewelry company could have been ordering or manufacturing this style clasp for years before it was placed on the end of this necklace and the patent date would stay the same...also i recently saw a watch case on www.watchuseek in the vintage watch forum that was dated 1899 with almost this exact style and coloring...the parent may also be from a missing clasp part as would be used to hook the chain to the top of the pocket watch...now new mystery...what are the small round ball on the back of the brooch for?ELLEN...THANKS FOR POSTING THIS FUN PIECE!Now on to the cameos...

I agree, Jewelerman. I expressed myself badly. 1871 is the earliest this necklace could have been made, but it certainly could have been made later!

In fact, I used that sort of clasp just the other day to make myself a watch fob necklace. I attached five clasps to an old men''s watch chain, and I hang various different fobs and lockets from my collection on them. Maybe I''ll take a picture.

Speaking of which, Ellen, would you indulge me with a neck shot of that lovely necklace?

I would like to see a post of your necklace ...i think antique mens jewelry looks great on women...in fact wear an 1880s onxy and rose gold spinner fob on a leather cord.Some day when i learn to post pictures i will post this fob for you...bought it at a second hand clothing store for $15...it has a man in the moon face carved in on side and a gothic style initial on the other.

 

[glitterata]

That sounds wonderful, Jewelerman. Are you, in fact, a man or a woman? Your name makes you sound like a man, but that comment about your fob makes you sound like a woman. Not that you have to choose, of course! You could be either or both or something altogether different, as far as I''m concerned. I hope I''m not being too nosy.

Ellen, sorry about the thread hijack.

 

[Love in Bloom]

Oh my goodness Ellen, thank you for sharing ... I love those TASSELS!!! What a beautiful and mysterious piece!

 

[glitterata]

Here''s my fob necklace. I use it to wear the various lockets and watch fobs I''ve inherited and collected over the years. I can clip on different fobs depending on my mood. Interestingly (interesting to me, anyway), the fob on the far right is my only Tiffany & Co piece. It''s a gold scholarship medal my great uncle Leon won in high school in 1917. Go Uncle Leon!!

Forgive me for the threadjack, Ellen?

 

[glitterata]

A bit bigger, so you can see today''s selection of fobs:

 

[geckodani]

So COOL! All of it! Thanks for the brief history lesson as well!

 

[glitterata]

Date: 9/3/2008 1:57:35 PM
Author: jewelerman
...now new mystery...what are the small round ball on the back of the brooch for?ELLEN...THANKS FOR POSTING THIS FUN PIECE!Now on to the cameos...

Jewelerman, I believe those balls are how the ornament on the front--the bird, bird''s nest, etc--gets attached to the pin. No?

 

[jewelerman]

Date: 9/3/2008 3:10:38 PM
Author: glitterata
That sounds wonderful, Jewelerman. Are you, in fact, a man or a woman? Your name makes you sound like a man, but that comment about your fob makes you sound like a woman. Not that you have to choose, of course! You could be either or both or something altogether different, as far as I''m concerned. I hope I''m not being too nosy.

Ellen, sorry about the thread hijack.

Glitterata,
I can see how you would be confused by my comment...not well written...I have always been a man.I have always liked the look of mens jewelry on women...which is a good thing because some of my ex-girlfriends still have some of my jewelry.I wear traditional gents jewelry but also dont like to lock myself into traditional looks...this old fob look great hanging from a leather cord or a watch fob.The onxy and rose gold actually look very masculine and a little gothic in style.You are not nosy and i dont mind the question as many of my jewelry choices are not traditional.

 

[jewelerman]

Date: 9/3/2008 4:09:20 PM
Author: glitterata

Date: 9/3/2008 1:57:35 PM
Author: jewelerman
...now new mystery...what are the small round ball on the back of the brooch for?ELLEN...THANKS FOR POSTING THIS FUN PIECE!Now on to the cameos...

Jewelerman, I believe those balls are how the ornament on the front--the bird, bird''s nest, etc--gets attached to the pin. No?

Yes!I bet you are 100% correct.

 

[jewelerman]

Date: 9/3/2008 3:51:29 PM
Author: glitterata
A bit bigger, so you can see today''s selection of fobs:

I REALLY LIKE THE LOOK!For myself... I would take uncle Leons(i also have an uncle Leon)tiffany award and thread it on a leather or rubberized cord to wear with jeans and a tee shirt.

 

[Ellen]

Firstly, glitter, you''re not threadjacking! This is all relevant, if not specifically to my particular necklace. I think it''s very interesting, so no worries!

I love your necklace, very neat. And yes, kudos to your unk!!



Yes, the balls seem to anchor the centerpiece.


I will be glad to get a neck shot, but it''s raining right now, and I''d rather get a better shot than I will in this funky indoor lighting. So I''ll get one as soon as I have better lighting.


Love and gecko, thank you!

 

[starsapphire]

Wow, that is really neat!

 

[coatimundi_org]

Ellen, I love this piece! The bird''s nest is fantastic!
Glitterata, beautiful fob necklace!