Featured Identification orange red stone and origin brooch

what kind of stone is this and when was it made?can't find any markings. it is 1,5 cm tall

 

what is written on the needle?

 

Looks mid 19th century. Can't say for sure on the stone from a pic, needs testing. Most common for this period and that colour would be glass or carnelian.

 

I'd think carnelian. Might be a tad later, late 19th.

 

Nothing written

 

@Ce BCA How can i test it?

 

If you have a good loupe you can look for air bubbles inside the stone - if there are any then it's glass. If not then it could be either, you'll need test equipment to tell, or just pop into a local jeweller/pawn shop they should tell you for sure.

In the pics the facet edges are a little soft, which can be an indicator of glass (but may just be the way the pic came out).

 

It is a beauty, but it has had a bit of life. I'm with @Ce BCA , mid 19th century.

Since you are in the Netherlands, it could be Dutch.
Carnelian is in the triad of coral-garnet-carnelian of Dutch traditional regional jewellery (streeksieraden). There were also glass imitations, especially of garnet (glasgranaat), but 'glascarneool' is not unheard of.
It looks like the stone was replaced. A glass imitation could have been put in.
Check the side of the C-clasp for tiny marks, that's where they usually are on 19th century Dutch brooches.

 

I made a few closeups of the stone and the c clasps. Also the big white plate. Looks there is something but cant read.

 

The setting looks like a memorial case from the early 1800's. It is probably low carot gold. May have had a tress of hair and a glass cover? The lip holding the stone looks as though it might have been misshapen, perhaps in the removal of the hair & glass and their replacement with a stone of unknown age? Pretty rough item.

 

I'd have to take a gem tester to it to be sure, most likely. Looks older than dirt and it wasn't treated kindly.

 

Does look like there’s something there.

 

The indentations on both the pin and the clasp look similar, which means they could be marks. If they are, they are pre-1853, the year the oakleaf mark was introduced for small .583 fineness gold items.
If only those Dutch would use bigger marks!

Below are the marks on a small .583 fineness gold brooch I have, which was made in 1856.
The marks are so tiny, it took me ages to figure out what they were. In this case I was lucky that it had the oakleaf on the clasp, and a clear(ish) W year mark on both clasp and pin.




There is also a maker's mark, but I can't read it. Likely to be a The Hague maker though, the brooch was worn with the 'burgerdracht' of Scheveningen, middle class ladies who didn't wear the regional costume. Scheveningen is a fishing village close to The Hague.

 

If it is Dutch, which is likely, it is at least .583 fineness, so a fraction below 14k. Here it would count as 14k.

 

Thanks everyone, its very helpfull. I'll gooing to to buy a 30x magnifiyer and hopefully can i see better. I tested for 14k and it looks like 14k gold

 

Buy a 10x loupe, get a decent triplet type - the 30x ones are mostly junk, too shallow in focus and too dark to be any good.

 

Thanks for the advice @Ce BCA. I really appreciate it. I am using the 10x camera magnifier app but it is not good enough. The marks are so small that it is almost impossible to focus. I'm not so sure a 10x loupe is going to work @Any Jewelry Hope you're fine, if not just ignore me.What kind of loupe did you use to take the photos you posted above?

 

The magnification factor is only part what is important. As you increase magnification you decrease light transmission and increase any flaws in the lens, so a 30x magnification needs a huge increase in quality over a 10x for the same result.

For example my microscope starts at 7x, and at that setting I can see smaller details and see far more clearly than with my expensive 10x loupe even given the lower magnification, it is about the quality of the optics.

For pics of fine detail on jewellery a cheap DSLR with a 1x macro lens (about £500-600 spend) will get you far better images than a £1500 phone with a 10x macro facility.

I recognise unless you are taking it seriously you won't want to be spending a lot on equipment. Just be aware that you will probably be disappointed with the performance of general consumer kit for these tasks.

 

Thanks again. I understand what you saying. And i definitely dont want spent a lof of money for equipment. The cheaper the better

 

I take photos primarily through a vintage to antique rug magnifier. My dad used it for stamps and it was used when he got it. The lens fits right up against my camera and the pictures are good and sharp. It's older than me, so I have no idea where to find another one!