Featured Hallmarks on a Silver Brutalist Ring?

I’m trying to find out who made this ring but my research has been unsuccessful so far.







Any help would be appreciated.

 

Interesting that it's marked both 925 and 800, hmm?

 

I was thinking the same. Maybe 800 is a design number?

 

Who knows. Too dark here yet to do research.

 

Not really seeing Brutalist, and believe it's a fairly modern piece - the three marks to the left of '925' appear to be from the London assay office, 'CS' the sponsor, '800' the only fineness option other than sterling available in the UK assay offices, indicating the ring was not quite up to to .925 standard, the leopard-head for the London office. There would be no lion-passant standard mark since it's not up .925 silver, and date marks optional, but not required after 1999...

~Cheryl

 

Thank you Cheryl!

 

From a 2016 British assay offices publication:









~Cheryl

 

I agree. A lot of this type is made in India, where 'random' stone setting is a tradition.

 

Interesting that someone went to the trouble of having a "925" imported ring assayed.

 

Didn't bother to look around, but India was my guess as well (especially given their somewhat casual use of '925' or 'sterling')...

~Cheryl

 

Would guess that the sponsor was suspicious of the fineness, doing the right (and legal) thing by having the goods assayed, and not offering sub-standard sterling silver for sale...

~Cheryl

 

There is an artist in Arizona who makes these sort of rings (and with 3 stones). When I see my accountant for my taxes, I will ask her the name of her jewelry maker.

 

I see a lot of this type of jewelry of craft shows.

 

India wants to join the International Hallmarking Convention (of the scales mark above), and has been taking steps. They are starting to get that marking problem under control, but it is a huge country with countless jewellery manufacturers.

 

I think I read in one posting that Sweden or Norway (Scandinavia anyway) use 800 and then changed the reference to 925, basically Sterling. So perhaps this was certified at changeover time!

 

They changed the silver fineness. It would be illegal to change the mark to 925 when the fineness was actually 800.

 

Sorry to have got that wrong. I thought they were the same but using a different number system. I shall not forget and get that wrong again, thanks.

 

I like the eclectic look of the ring. Interesting discussion here, too.