Gold Cameo Ring - Who is this?

Hello, wondering if anyone has any insight as to who the person is on this ring? I’ve been doing some research and have found many very similar, and a couple almost exactly the same cuts on other rings. This ring belongs to my father who purchased it about 50 years ago. Don’t know what the stone is, the ring is 18k. Thanks for any insight!

 

Hi, @Bronwen will know if no one else answers before tomorrow.
Be sure to check back. People come and go at all hours.
Welcome to the board.

 

Welcome Judge. That is an impressive ring.
Could we see the back, including the back of the cameo?

Until Bronwen arrives I can tell you that the style of the ring proper is Brutalist, which was indeed fashionable ca 50 yrs ago. Brutalism is one of the Modernist styles.
Brutalist means it looks like it was made from the raw molten material, with no other work done to it. Of course that is the look only, this is a well thought out and executed design.

 

This is the best description I've ever read, of "brutalist" style, thank you, AJ.

 

I'm having trouble seeing the wreath really clearly, but overall, looks like an Apollo to me.

http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/record/43958D4A-A18A-472D-A2F1-D8F99B49249D

Some possibility it is Bacchus/Dionysus. Would need to see the foliage better.

It appears to be a glass impression taken from an intaglio. You will often see them called tassies. James Tassie's name has become a common noun like kleenex & gets used for all types of gem impressions. It's true his 18th century workshop churned out a flood of them, but his success naturally led others to wade in & such impressions continue to be made to this day.

I see no reason to think this impression is any older than the ring it is set in. It may seem incongruous to set a glass cameo in an 18K ring, but it happens. I associate these massive gold rings with the 1970s. Gold was a lot less expensive then.

 

Looks more like gold nugget style.

 

and my 1st thought was gold wash style....?
i'm not getting a brutalist vibe...

 

Wow, thank you for all the input. There is a wreath there for sure and I thought it might be Apollo. Here is an image of the back of the stone.

 

Interesting.
Do you think it is stone or glass?
Might be a chunk of garnet - @Hollyblue

 

I often misinterpret photos & am in a bit of a rush right now, but, any chance the faceted back & the impressed front are 2 separate pieces being held together by the mount? If I had seen the back first I would have been prepared to see an engraved ruby, but the obverse is no ruby. Trying to make out what is going on right at the outer edge, where the mount begins to hide it.

 

I was led to believe it was an ingraved ruby. Interesting to think it may be 2 compounds glued together at the mount with the face being an “imprint”, if I have that correct. Like glass, something maliable when hot.

 

Just a guess since photos are hard to interpret.... It looks like there are 2 stones,the nugget/melted top of the ring was soldered onto an existing ring.Maybe trying to shine a light thru the bottom of the stone might show something. No one else is seeing the dragons in the silver thread.

 

Looks like a single unit.

 

only dragonflywink...

 

You need a gem tester to get the answer.

 

There's no way this pitted surface is ruby. Even if the ring was worn daily & suffered the knocking around rings get, neither ruby nor garnet would end up looking like this. Where I've put in the shaky blue line is where it seems like there is some kind of transition from rough to smooth. Is this strictly a lighting artifact?

That's what I'm seeing, a molded piece.

I don't see evidence of a seam in the backlit photo. I have a 14K ring with what is meant to look like a carved citrine. The underside is faceted & there are even minute diamonds around it. It is glass.

 

it looks like a seam....
but it's rough to smooth !!

 

@Bronwen, This may help with your question about the crown, but it may also help with your question about 2 pieces later on.....

 

that's no ruby...