I purchased a 14k 6 1/2 ring adorned with a 8-9 mm pinkish red stone that was thought to be a ruby by previous owner’s great grandmother who brought the heirloom ring over from Poland along with just a suitcase to immigrate to US. That was 1890s. was born 1864. Thoughts? The seller was being genuine. I have photographed under different lighting and magnified. Given age of ring, it would only be synthetic if the original stone was lost from the bezel and replaced. I have reached out to a gemologist through BriteCo for Massachusetts.
Hi Chris! Welcome to the community!
I agree that a synthetic ruby of that size is unlikely, unless it was a replacement (circa 1920’s).
Can you describe what light sources you used in the images? In IMG_1261 (and a few others): I see some purplish reflections on the facet surfaces… was that from using a UV light? If so, is it LW or SW?
The claw type prongs were used in the Victorian Era. The facet cut resembles some styles that had two rows of step cuts on the crown, but the square table is not a common shape for a round stone. (At least from what I have observed).
The meet-points and the facet edges seem very precise and somewhat “new/crisp” for an older stone. That is not what I would expect to see from a hand-cut or machine cut ruby from that era. However, corundum is very durable and wear-resistant, so that’s not a tell-tale.
The “old-mine cut” was not exclusively used for diamonds in that era, but this stone doesn’t seem to fit that category either.
Interesting…