Featured Gem experts please - is this a ruby, a garnet or something else?

Hi all,

I've posted this ring before:

bought as a ruby ring from a well-known antiquity dealer in uk about two years ago. I never doubt the authenticity of the stone, but as today I got a chance to test it with the cheapest conductivity tester, it indicates a stone with lower hardness- around 6-8 or something. It significantly differs from other rubies of various sizes which doesn't seem like a calibration issue. It contains these inclusions one would expect from ruby and garnet, as shown here:
it flashes as the ring turns and has bluish shine

and it does not glow under uv light.

I know it cannot be fully identified with only these, but what do you think I may have here? Do you think the 'ruby' is stone dead given the judgement of the tester? Any chance for the tester to be wrong? The stone does not really matter for this ring, but I just want to know more...

 

Well I just checked my other garnet pieces... found the exact same inclusions in it, so I guess that's it. It's been years and I've left uk, so there's no way to dispute or return (I would still keep it anyway). Maybe they're just not that professional in gemstones, who knows!

I put too much trust in sellers and too late when I finally see the problem. Collecting antiques has becoming too tiring as my paranoid grows with my collection lol

 

Garnet makes much more sense for a ring like this than ruby. And it has a garnet-y colour.
But whatever the stone, it is a beauty.

 

When I saw it for the first time I thought it's a garnet too. But seller said ruby. Paying anyway!

Just think it's kinda unacceptable for such mistake which could be corrected with the cheapest tester, from a highly-reputable dealer

 

I agree.
But we have all been there, one way or another. I see it as part of my education.
I hope you still enjoy wearing it anyway. Otherwise I would be more than willing to give it a good and loving home. Smoke free too.

 

This is my most expensive jewelry, so really expensive education

and rehoming it will be embarrassing as it comes with a stupid COA stating that thing being a ruby. So I might just wear it to my grave till the day it’s be found again by a metal detector

 

Of course I don't know how much you paid, but an enameled gold and garnet Renaissance ring would be expensive too.

 

But this ring… sold to me as glass, yet faintly glows under uv light… tests positive for sapphire. So, a good news, and a bad news

 

I paid 3500 pounds

 

Yay!!!

 

I think I just passed out ! As we say in the South when we dont know what to say "Bless your heart" !

 

lol I thought that’s the normal market price for these ancient trinkets, maybe even on the lower side

 

The only way to positively ID a stone like that is by a gem tester, we can only guess from a photo. Maybe it would be a good idea to buy a gem tester to protect yourself?

How did you test the sapphire?

 

I use the common diamond tester, it’s accurate for 99% of my jewels, instantly beeps when touching real rubies and diamonds, so don’t think it would mistake these two

 

The color looks like tourmaline or ... red beryl. There's a red form of emerald that's legitimately rare. I've never seen one in person. If it's that, suddely 3000 quid for one in an antique setting sounds like a snip.

 

I’ve never see another contemporary ring with red stones apart from ruby and garnet… I wonder if there is any exception like spinel or as you said, red beryl

 

The Black Prince's Ruby in the British state crown is actually a big red spinel, so that would be a possibility too.

 

Red tourmaline and topaz........... https://www.google.com/search?clien...HUt_MIUQtKgLegQIFBAB&biw=1182&bih=619&dpr=1.3 https://www.google.com/search?q=red...IHEAAYgAQYCpgDAIgGAZIHAzUuMaAHlBs&sclient=img

 

That’s what I thought too. Just ordered a better loupe so hope I could find some typical inclusions there lol

 

Btw this is an early renaissance ring and I can’t find any jewels with these stones dated likewise