Featured What Type of Stone Is This?

It’s a milky green/brown with orange flecks. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thank You!

 

bloodstone/Heliotrope

 

That was fast!!

Thank You very much!!

 

Very nice ring, Shwikman, but don't you want to know who made it? Or do you know already?
Anyway, it looks like it was made by Henry Hyde Aston in Birmingham in 1863.
9k gold and heliotrope as Holly said.

 

Heliotrope was used a lot in seals. Wondering if this was designed to be a small signet ring but never engraved.

 

Having just caught up on the overnight posting to spartcom's thread about another Birmingham gold ring, let me raise the question - how can this be 1863 when there is no monarch's head?

 

That does seem the right year for the date letter:

https://theassayoffice.com/date-letters

 

Same reply as in the other thread:
I read some time ago that compulsory marking of gold jewellery was a relatively late thing in Britain, but of course I can't find it now.

Most of my 19th century British rings are only marked 9ct or something basic like that. I have two British Georgian pieces of gold jewellery (well three, one is a pair of earrings) that are not marked at all. Maybe something to do with the weight?

 

Similar debate going on here:

https://www.antiquers.com/threads/my-oldest-ring-1859-birmingham-9ct-band-idea-on-maker.37422/

 

@Ownedbybear 's clarification on the gold jewellery marking question:
"It was weight dependent - under 1g for gold, from memory, was exempt.

Yes, monarch's head goes on gold as well. That 9 and .375 was introduced as standard in 1932."

 

So potentially 1938 - http://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk/Dates/Birmingham/Date Letters O.html

 

Potentially, if this one has the wrong cartouche as well. But then there is the maker's mark which looks like Henry Hyde Aston's to me, in which case the date of 1863 would fit:


Henry Hyde Aston 1862..1869
(registered Feb 1862)
https://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk/Makers/Birmingham-HA-HB.html#HA

 

This is a great resource to ID stones.
https://rocktumbler.com/polished-stones/

 

That is great! Thank You!
I don’t really know much about the ring. Most everything else in this estate that’s real gold or of any significance was set aside or in safe deposit. This was in a small box in a drawer full of costume jewelry/odds n ends(I’ll try to post some stuff later). In the box with it was a little jade pendant that doesn’t seem anyway related to the ring.
The ring does look pretty beat-up, like maybe something that was found in a field somewhere. Also, I don’t have any proper English ancestors as far as I know but it’s very possible, or even likely somebody may have traveled there.

 

Doesn't matter, improper ones also owned jewellery sometimes.

 

I’m

Got Me!!

Here’s the little jade ‘droplet’ that was with the ring:

 

That is really lovely, Shwikman. It could be from New Zealand. Did any (im)proper relatives ever travel Down Under? What is the size?

 

Just a little one:

I haven’t found any overly festive boomerangs or anything so I’m not sure if anyone traveled to Oz or NZ.
I can say I’ve very familiar with Big Sur jade and this seems very similar. I’m not suggesting it is from Big Sur, just saying that appears to be a match in terms of geology.

 

What does the mark on the top of the bail say?