Scottish Tay Pearl locket on Ebay

Hmm, 10 carat gold means that it's not British made.
And I wonder what the provenance is that says it's a Tay pearl ?
 
Should be hallmarked. There's enough gold for it to be a legal requirement here, and yes, the low standard is 9ct. 10ct is not specifically marked
 
British gold standards as far as I know:
Only 22 carat from 1575 until 1798;
In 1798 18 carat was introduced and both 22 carat and 18 carat were permitted;
In 1854 9 carat, 12 carat and 15 carat were introduced and were permitted standards alongside 22 and 18;
In 1931 12 carat and 15 carat were replaced with 14 carat.
I believe we've never had a 10 carat gold standard.
 
I bow to you on the history of the various hallmark standards Sue.
If you read the listing carefully there's a lot of fluff about Queen Victoria but no actual provenance or proof it is a Scottish pearl. It could be a UK freshwater pearl from any one of several rivers or the whole thing could be a big lump of rather clunky hooey (no proof it's gold, no proof it's a UK river pearl, prob not made in UK and not old)

(nb imported 10ct has to be marked as 9ct)
 
Hi Wendy,
Sorry, I don't mean to sound school marm-ish; I am pedantic by nature :( and am very tuned-in to inconsistencies in the story-telling when it comes to "antique" jewellery.
There are so many rogues about.
 
I love that you shared this information. You guys can duke it out anytime, we always benefit ;-)

I love reading your posts, both of you, anytime!

(uh-oh, are you guys looking at each other thinking "oh, dreadful. Yanks and their dreadful, pugilistic references...a civilised discussion, characterised as a brawl...")
 
Last edited:
Hey Sue, I didn't think you were schoolmarmish...just had the relevant knowledge. And that is a very good thing.
That is a real snake oil listing

Lisa..pugilism I can cope with. We just don't do guns over here
 
Hehe.....Interesting to read your reactions to this piece!

To add my 'ten pence worth'....it looks totally genuine to me. Tay pearls did (and still do) exist...and are to be found in jewellery, particularly Victorian period pieces. Is there anyone who can prove that it is a Tay pearl? It certainly looks like those Scottish pearls that I've seen in museums. Maybe the listing should have been less specific and said 'Scottish' rather than Tay. As to the gold? I'd say chances are its 9ct...it's a very fine skill to test between the two!! As it's 'gemset' with the agates it would've been exempt from hall marking on those grounds, if not weight (take the glass out of the equation it'd be a bit lighter)..in any case it's really quite unusual to see fully hallmarked Victorian gold lockets. A lot of work has gone into the construction of this piece.

What is so interesting about the conversations on PG is their diversity. For me, I've handled jewellery like this locket and it looks right.....but I'm having one devil of a job understanding the intricacies between all the differing types of pearls available nowadays. So much knowledge of this kind can only be reinforced by seeing and handling.
 
It may well be that a licence is needed to sell this pearl if it is genuine.(Nature Conservation (Scotland) 2004 Act) If the gold is only 9ct the seller is applying a false description in claiming a higher ct. In any case, no hallmark, it can only legally be described as yellow metal.
Having gemstones makes no difference whatsoever to a requirement for a hallmark. If in doubt on this consult, inter alia, Goldsmith's Hall and the London Assay Office. (The current legislation is the Hallmarking Act 1973, which has been amended by Hallmarking (Exempted Articles) (Amendment) Order 1975, the Hallmarking (International Convention) Order 1976 (as amended), the Hallmarking (Exempted Articles) Orders 1982 and 1986, and the Hallmarking (Approved Hallmarks) Regulations 1986. Further changes to the legislation were made by the Hallmarking (Hallmarking Act Amendment) Regulations 1998, to bring the UK legislation in line with the rest of Europe.)
 
I'm aware of the current hallmarking legislation, but this item was made prior to 1975. Gemset pieces were exempt until 1975 ( I would say perhaps 95% of the prior to 1975 gemset rings etc. we sell in our shop have no hallmark, often just a stamp denoting the carat). Amendments were made to the 1975 Act in 2007, allowing items which could be proven to be manufactured before 1950 and of minimum fineness to be sold as gold without a hallmark. This was in recognition of the fact that so many older pieces were not fully hallmarked, so that they could be legally sold without the requirement to hallmark them before selling, as it was recognised that this practice was in some way defacing an antique item. If this locket is 1860's or thereabouts, these rules would apply.

I'd love to know whether a licence would be needed to retail this pearl.
....but, reconsidering your comments about the listing, and looking closely at the setting, it looks a bit messy, like the setting has been tightened on the pearl. Maybe it has been stuck in there as a replacement? To boost the price? Maybe it's a marriage? How, I'd love to be able to get a loupe on it!!
 
Last edited:
I love that we have all these knowledgable people on the forum! Thank you all for sharing!

- Karin
 
How do you prove it's a genuine Victorian piece without a hallmark, hbyrne? In the case of this listing there are too many disputable facts for my liking, especially for the asking price.
Of course it isn't just Tay river pearls, or even Scottish river pearls which are protected. There are freshwater mussel colonies all around the UK. I was told recently about one living in a man-made but very old pond which was fed by a stream. The landowners wanted to clear and refurbish the pond so had to move the mussels temporarily to another of their ponds while the work was done. Would have been amazing to x-ray them. All survived and some were huge, probably at the 100 year old mark
 
Back
Top