Thanks again and sorry about the clumsiness of this post, I am new here and have yet to figure out the posting system.

Again, any help would be greatly appreciated. I do have many more pictures but wont post them until I figure out how to do it by not driving anyone nuts!
Annie

I see a stone, the center stone, a teardrop shaped stone, that is not Turquoise, it is Gem Silica Chrysocolla with Malachite inclusions, the color and variety indicate Inspiration Mine, Globe, Arizona, actually the Live Oak Pit part of the mine......Operated mainly in 1897 to 1920......the date on your piece is not legible but it would help determine if the blue green stones were a later replacement or original.....the stone to the immediate left of the Gem Silica also appears to be Chrysocolla, but this time instead of the Chalcedony variety it looks to be the quartz variety from Mexico found at a much later date......I would at least perform a scratch test to determine if the stone were Turquoise, I guarantee the center stone is not. Also the far left stone is Amazonite, a stone found in Colorado since 1876, something tells me that the stones have been replaced over the years with similar looking stones.....the work is not from some great Jewelry Salon of the time but possibly a local craftsperson, the work is very nice but and it appears to have some mass produced components as well, I think that unless you have some historical documentation for anything other than what is obvious, the value will lie in the wallet of the beholder and the price you would sell it at. It would be super cool to find an old photo with someone wearing it! I for one love it!!! But I am biased towards the Chrysocolla

TASART, your knowledge of these stones is truly amazing. To pinpoint the age AND the mine? I think u are right about several things, gems were replaced, they arent turquoise, certainly not all, if any and they certainly do look like Chrysocolla. Now why your fascination with this particular stone? It is eccentric and beautiful that is for sure. I wanted to look at some of your beads but you dont have any listed~! Also, I'm not being lazy well, yes I am but the Amazonite. What is it and yes I'll look it up but would love to hear it from the horses mouth, is that a form of turqouise? and given you guess Colorodo 1876 wouldnt that in itself make it valuable. Incredible work, I'm in awe- and slightly nauseous since it is obvious how little I know about gemstones as well as this piece. (I can see the ad write up now when I go to sell it. LOL, is all I can say.) "Well, it could be [xxxx] but its probably not from [xyz date] but its probably not that either, although there is a good chance the artist did this [xyzp] but I cant be sure. In fact I'm not sure of anything!! So if you like it just buy it. Heck it might contain the next Hope Diamond for all that we know." (With my luck it would and I'd have sold it for $200.00)

actually I said: "Also the far left stone is Amazonite, a stone found in Colorado since 1876" key word in the phrase is since, I haven't a clue when, I just remember some 20 years ago a new Colorado discovery yielded a few tons of super quality Amazonite and I also remember the stones all had a mottled appearance blue with white, they are a Feldspar, so no quartz but similar..........the Teardrop Gem Silica is from the Inspiration area of Arizona, the inclusions are Malachite and if you look at the stone in the proper light the Malachite could even be chatoyant!!!
See the attached picture, until just recently all the chatoyant Malachite was found in Arizona.....

So, tasart, are you saying you think the Egyptian Scarab is made of Amazonite and not Turquoise? Sorry, you all this has been one heck of a piece to learn gemstones on. I am still trying to piece it all together.

Tazart, I have no doubt that the center teardrop is Amazonite as you describe. I would also venture to say that the square stone directly to the left (and perhaps the rectangle to the right) is from the same stone, maybe even the same mine.

The date on the piece is 1820. It is signed by the artisan "G.R"

Still unsure about the scarab and the teardrop to the far left, that looks like raw turquoise, the one on the right could be jade?

This has become an endlessly fascinating and frustrating puzzle!

Could this be a more modern piece (last 30-40 years) assembled out of a variety of older / antique components?

Rosanna, that is my guess at this point. And that's what my family has said. That made no sense at first until I got all my great aunts stuff, which I am now disassembling parts that I like from and putting into my own creation. So I guess this is what artisans do. (I do not consider myself an artisan, just a designer and producer of "art as jewelry". Totally untrained, just make what I like and learn as I go.
So yes, I can see that as being exactly what this is, the problem is how do you go about even valuing a piece like this? I mean to think the one part could have been made in 1820, the neck/choker made at some other time and the part with the gemstones something completely different made God knows when and by whom and then the gemstones replaced as time went one.
Is this normal? Or is both my aunt and this piece both a freak! lol. How do you value you something like this, I have a feeling there is a term for it on here? Something like "open your wallet" and take a good guess! Something is kind of only worth what another person is willing to pay. Intrinsic value here? Impossible to estimate or maybe not. There must be a "not less than" number. (I know you guys and ladies dont deal in prices but I mean really I think no matter what I price it as someone will complain about something- they always seem to when you make a piece with parts from different eras.)

The green/white variegated stone on the left looks very much like some beads I have made of so called Russian green amazonite.

Dee & I think that all but the left most piece are probably turquoise. Over the years we sold Native American and SW jewelery we've seen all those colors and types of matrix. The left most piece might be glass (Czech) simulated turquoise or one of the various other similar colored stones suggested. It could be turquoise but definitive answers are hard from pictures like these. Handling the piece, backlighting the stones, using a loupe, etc can only be done in person.

We agree that the piece appears to be assembled from non related components.

The stones we think are turquoise are typical of US mined turquoise from the 50's to current times. With wear and absorption of oils many untreated turquoise will "green up" to give similar colors.

It's an interesting piece, to be sure.

it is actually a real simple matter of doing a scratch test with a pocket knife, chances are the right stone (Turquoise, Phosphate mineral) will scratch because it is under a hardness of 6 on the Mohs scale and the center 5 stones will not scratch (Silicated Chrysocolla, Chalcedony, Quartz minerals) because they are 7 on the Mohs scale and the furthest left stone (Amazonite, Feldspar mineral) is above 7 in hardness so it won't scratch either. There is much more that tell me I'm right on these stones, the surface, the colors etc........the Turquoise has the dull surface you would expect from an older piece while the copper impregnated Chalcedony/Quartz stones still appear glassy and shiny and the Feldspar has a shinier surface also, I rule out glass as well, I have cut many grams of all the materials and I am very familiar with them, I realize this is one man's opinion but it is based on many years of actually working with all the types shown.

Wow. Who knew? This is just fascinating. There IS alot of silica in the scarab stone, that I can see. And I was thinking maybe jade but given how dark those center beads are...they are really hard but I havent done the scratch test yet. and the stone on the left LOOKS like Turquoise (that teardrop) but in it is a whole lot of other things.

I will say these stones are beautifully set AND polished, it looks like someone took an awful lot of care with setting these stones, not something someone would do with junk. And then there is a the metal, half tests as silver the rest looks almost like pewter with a higher copper content but who would go through all this trouble and then use junk? (Dont answer, if this was done in the 1800;s which now I seriously doubt at least not all of it, maybe they had A LOT more time on their hands but did they even take costume jewelry seriosuly back then? I mean really, what artisan at any age in time except maybe out lifetime would have been able to put so much effort into a costume piece. Only one part (the part that holds the beads looks like the filigree could have been mass produced. The rest of it? I dont see how.

nishedha may be correct here. Looking at the pictures on a larger screen I notice the lines molded or carved into the left most pendant that suggest it is a scarab beetle shape. It is a more uniform calibrated shape than the other pieces, too.

Yes, it certainly does look like an egyptian scarab but it has other qualities that I've never seen, for example A LOT of silica, the design itself seems to be very eroded and it is SO almost "lime green" (ok, lime green with a tint of blue) with veins of almost a forest green running through it and a kind of brown cast (very light, it could be an optical illusion). I've never seen a stone that looks like this. The design does look scarab for sure but its my understanding- probably totally wrong- that this doesnt mean it came from egypt. But the stone would probably have to be soft enough to take this kind of etching although it does not look deeply carved and while it does look highly polished only half of the stone (the top half) really looks like it has any etching (grooves).

I could not have picked a more complicated piece to learn all this on, could I have?

Yes, I noticed the carving too.

Anne, a 'cabochon' is typically flat (often rough) on one side and finished on the other. A cab can be smooth, textured, or carved. Modern carving tools make it possible to carve many types of stone. The scarab is totally normal in that respect.

My guess is one or more of the original stones has been replaced.

My suggestion of amazonite (the Russian variety) is only an educated guess based on appearance in the photo. Only you can see the finer details, like the crystalline structure of stone, or the bubbles and swirls of glass. Glass? I don't see that here, but I could be mistaken.

I agree about the entire necklace being very attractive. VERY beautiful.

Birdie if that is the definition of a cab than yes, this is a cab. ;) Its so tiny tho, I always think of cabs as big. I too have bought a lot of scarabs, in turquoise, mostly from China or Japan and the thing about those is that the lines are SO deep I assume they are mass produced and the turquoiuse is so blue and consistant, I mean its costume of course but supposedly turquoise. THIS one however the etchings are so light! and the colors? And what looks like silica or mica, I just dont know. There is this sheen, actually sparkle from whatever metal or mineral is mixed in. It doesnt look like anything I've ever seen and I am not sure when they started to do carvings by machine, do you? I mean from the erosion this gem must be at least 40 years old, I would think: and hand done. Altho the egyptians did build the pyramids and no one can figure that out. lol. so maybe they knew how to mass produce scarabs. Thank u for the compliment on this piece. I guess that is one thing we all can agree on, it is unique and I think beautiful. The other odd thing about this piece is the neck is very small. 7" before the added chain. This tells me something. It was made for a time when people were tinier. (Ever go into a house on Cape Cod? You get the idea.) I cant imagine anyone producing a necklace this size today. Americans are much beefier. This was made for a very refined neck, imo. To me it belongs in a museum in a way although I would gladly wear it, I just dont have many galas coming up and I'd rather have the money. lol. Alhtough I know (when( if I sell this I will regret it. It really is the kind of piece that one could wear for a really incredible occasion. I tired to attach better photos of the scarab but bf kept kept telling me to make them smaller. After a point it lost all the detail! I'll try again.

The silver work is also intriguing. The top section looks Scandinavian? Denmark? Norwegian? c1910, but the lower section looks like a piece off of european chatelaine.
All the bezels and rings on the pendants appear to be made by the same silversmith as well.
Curiouser and curiouser....

Jeff, I just saw this response and am very intrigued by your observations. I'm sorry its taken so long to get back on this board but yes you are correct this piece gets curiouser and curiouser. What leads you to the conclusions about the origins of the silver. I am fascinated by your ability to spot the difference and would love to know more about what you see. Thank you!
This piece really is a trip down both world history and many cultural lanes. I think it belongs in a museum but that's just me. (Once I figure out what we've got here I may end up in a museum having been mummified!)

cc: Jeff's email

I have since cleaned up the silver and the marking(s) are visible just not in this photo. Tried to shoot better pics for you but my battery on camera is recharging. :(

I've been through every post and opinion and still am not quite sure. Who is willing to just so one by one and state quite simply what you believe they are. Left to right is fine.

Thanks so much for any more info because this piece has given me both an ulcer not to mention a migraine! Your opinion, of course, is highly valued as well as appreciated! believe me.

My God, Tasart, Rosanna and birdi, you all are truly impressive! Now I'm more confused than ever. Rosanna, yes, it is quite possible that this is a composite of pieces put together by my aunt- or someone. Tasart, your knowledge on the variations in gemstones is phenomenal and birdi...now what do I do?

You are all correct, There is no way to verify the authenticity of this piece. It is really stunning and exotic (at least I think so) and certainly unique I dont even know how value it let alone describe it!

Have we determined anything here for sure, I mean are there any absolutes?
Let me ask, why would someone sign and date the center piece if that part of the necklace wasnt done at that time by that artisan? I could see that being taken from another piece but I dont see any incentive behind a forgery. (My great aunt was a millionaire, she didnt need the money and her reputation was everything. Very well regarded in her artisan community.) But who knows. She told my aunt this was turquoise. For all I know she did that for the sake of simplicity. I never discussed her crafts with her (my loss) we were close. So all I know is hearsay, from my aunt who took care of her estate. Side note: no one in the family was into this sort of thing and I think they thought of it all as "crafts", I doubt they even had this appraised.

Below is the piece as it would look on, if you were made of black velvet. lol.

After seeing the lighting on the piece in your last post I can tell you for certain that only one stone is Turquoise, the far right, the center stones are all Gem Silica Chrysocolla and the far left stone is Amazonite....It would be wonderful to get a history of it, it is fascinating and really cool looking......another note, Lapidary was not a precision craft out west in the old days, with the exception of some Native tribes (Zuni needle point), the Gem Silica would have required something a bit more advanced for cutting than what the Turquoise would require, I don't believe that the Gem Silica was being actively cut until the the 1940's and later. The stippled letters are also cool, what could they mean, the maker's initials, an event, the person it was made from or presented from???? The component that has the initials could have been from and earlier time and have nothing to do with the current piece, just left there because it looked cool???? Too bad you may never know, if you are ever in the Phoenix area, I would love to see it in person......also, backlight the stones, the center stones should all light up and transmit the light, the far right not at all and the left stone partially, good luck, Thomas
PS let me know if you ever plan on trading it away or selling it

I have been wondering how one can judge these stones based on this picture. I am sure experience and knowledge are key, I just wished I had some more of both.
Even after reading some basic turquoise sources I am struggling to see the difference between waxed, dyed or stabilized turquoise let alone from a picture. Sigh.... still a very long way to go....

So what I sometimes presumed to be waxed/dyed turquoise or from different turquoise mines (which I thought might be the case for some of the stones on this necklace) could have been Chrysocolla.

What are the major differentiating elements betw. turquoise and Chrysocolla (besides transmitting of light)?
Anyone please??

Martine, I know a few gemstones because of beads I have bought. I bought from somewhat reliable sources and I keep the labels on the strands. Some minerals are more distinctive than others. I also study beads at bead stores, even if I don't buy them. I read the gem pages at Rings and Things. I look at lapidary websites that show cut slab. Here is a favorite website (I've never done business there) where I've spent hours looking at photos. The photos of gem slabs change frequently. link below

Chrysocolla is new to me. Fascinating. Beautiful. Maybe I have some, who knows.

Turquoise has me completely confused. I buy known Chinese turquoise, the real stuff, from bead stores and can recognize it fairly well. But mostly I buy turquoise colored stone beads at thrift stores, as long as it is attractive and looks like real stone... who knows what it really is. I have a lot of it and don't know what to do with it.

I know nothing comes easy and I should be more patient sometimes. Thank you Birdi for the encouraging words. I found watching good Turquoise vendor sites a great help as well. You see great variations from a same mine as well as products from different mines. Great visual aids.

Here are the two I came across and watch regularly (haven't bought from them)

http://www.nevadagem.com/pages/turquoise.html

http://www.cabbers.com/cabs/turquoise/index.shtml

I am still struggling to see the difference between a waxed a dyed and a stabilized turquoise. Anyone? Please.

It is extremely difficult to tell if a piece of Turquoise has been treated, there are several ways the stones are treated, also there are so many other types of stone passed off as Turquoise that it confuses even more. Knowing the source of material is a key especially for the high dollar stuff, I stopped in at Tony Cotner's room at the Tucson show (Damale Turquoise mine)and I looked at some fossil replacement Turquoise and Variscite valued in the tens of thousands of dollars.....I know that Danny Lopaki has cut many beads for Ernie Montoya a Southwestern mine owner and operator (Carico Lake Turquoise Mine)and I'm sure Danny can tell us about material we could only dream of holding, again stones in the thousands.....then the opposite end of the spectrum, the current crop of dyed Howlite (or Magnesite) is marketed as turquenite and sells for a few dollars a pound......good luck

Thank you Thomas, this is a really cool detailed map. I've seen similar ones in 'Turquoise, the gem of the centuries' by Oscar T. Branson and in the New Mexico Magazine 'The allure of Turquoise', but yours is more detailed with more sample stones and better photographed.

The link looks familiar, but I had not saved it, so thank your for that!

I have been browsing through the BCN archives and read almost every thread about turquoise and indeed came across Danny's messages quite frequently as well as from others.(there is one picture of Danny on top of a turquoise pile somewhere in China -I think-, which I won't easily forget! Nor the pictures of Russ I think with a storage full of different turquoise coloured resin, a real wake-up call)
I have learned a lot, and became less naive about the turquoise and all its fakes, copies etc one can buy on the net but I still could not find a set of guidelines that helps to distinguish waxed from dyed from stabilized turquoise . And maybe that is hard to describe , but there must be some clues?

So Danny,and other turquoise specialists,if you have some spare time we could start a new thread on this subject???
Thank you!

karavanserai, I agree, a new thread on turquoise is warranted. As well as some of these other similar looking gemstones. This may be a very dumb question but is Turquoise only indigenous to the US? (I know I could google the question but its not the same.)

As far as the junk they sell overseas yes, it is junk, such as "howlite" imo, but some people just like to buy turquoise colored stones and cant afford or wouldnt know the difference between the real thing. I probably used to be one of them!

I'm glad I'm not the only one whose confused. You both put it really well about all the variations and the learning curve and those links...I will look at them when I detox from all the info already inside my head. lol. I feel punch drunk and no I dont drink.
It certainly is an adventure one that I would guess never ends. I mean at what point does the learning end? Probably never.

This piece should be like given to some gemstone learning hospital or something like they do with cadavers that have some strange disease. It could be used as a teaching tool for years and I wonder who or when, if anyone, would ever figure it out. TASART you certainly seem to have the most encyclopedic knowledge. I award you the cadaver just for that alone. lol. Only kidding. How I wish that I could. ALL of you are really impressive.
Going to defrag my brain then I will look at those links.

That was an amazing analysis, and I am of course completely overwhelmed. I tent to agree only one stone is Turquoise and I am inclined to think that its the scarab. I would have gone to AZ if I had known about the festival and rodeos in Tuscon! But I just found you guys and this web site and well, I just wish I knew.

But yes, that's what I do. I plan on selling it. I think its an amazing piece and I dont think my family has any idea what it has (and yes I've told them to send me the rest of the estate, plus I have a bunch more pieces that I was going to post but I am trying really hard not to drive any of you nuts. and I also dont believe in taking and not giving and trying to think of what expertise I can bring to this board. And it isnt gemstones, lol.)

But yes, that is the reason I'm doing this, to sell it. It belongs on the neck of a very elegant exotic woman and I think it is worth something no matter what the heck it is. Tasart, write me privately if you'd like, I'd certainly be open to sending it to you for you to look at and or appraise it (i'd pay you to appraise it) and if you did want to buy it we of course could talk. I mean that all gets very touchy, as a businessperson I trust no one but as gemologists (you all not me...yet) and lovers of jewelry (probably all of us) I know our reputations are MOST important, far more important than making a fast buck.

Annie

Thank you! Looks like great lit. I'l start straight away.

Amazing, talk about insightful. Much thanks to the person who exposed this fraud and did something about it. The-vug is fantastic. What a great find. I am quite skeptical that this retailer was in the dark about his so called supplier.

....but my head hurts from looking at those 65 pound fake turquoise boulders!

Some of the issues are caused by names and languages.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

Do you remember the quote from Barbara written down during her visit to Beijing Geological Museumlisting all the different stones and minerals that are considered "Jade?" 14 materials, only 2 that we'd call "jade."

At Tucson a few years back a Chinese seller was *trying* to differentiate between real and imitation turquoise. One pile was labeled "Natural Turquoise." The other pile labeled "Stabilized Turquoise."

In reality the first pile was actual turquoise but stabilized with clear resin. The 2nd pile was blue dyed magnesite that was probably also stabilized with resin. Neither pile was "natural."

Buyers and sellers both need to ask questions and learn the differences.

at how much you all know as well as the conflicting opinions. I guess nothing is written in stone (no pun intended. Gemstone, to be exact.) ;)
I am trying to absorb all this information and not respond piece meal and drive you all nuts but yes TASART, I do think this piece is amazing, whatever it is lol it IS unique. (love it or hate it I guess.)
Thanks so much people, I'm really impressed. Another pun but, I'm trying to put all the pieces together and see what to make of all your great info. (God, I hate the pun. surely the lowest form of humor but I guess gemstones and jewelry just begs for it. To do this we must have rocks in our head. ;) lol. Kidding. Sort of. ;)