François-Désiré Froment-Meurice (1802-1855) was one of the most important French jewellers and silversmiths of the nineteenth century, described by famed author Victor Hugo as the Cellini of his age. His works were acquired by royalty throughout Europe, including Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, Louis Philippe and Queen Maria Amelia of France, the Queen of Naples, the Duchess of Parma, and the royal family of Spain to name a few.

His firm perhaps reached its greatest fame after the Great Exhibition of 1851 in London, where they won the prestigious Council Medal. The Art Journal Illustrated Catalogue wrote of their stand: ‘The visitor to the Great Exhibition may search in vain…for works more truly beautiful of their class, than those contributed by M. Froment-Meurice.’ Queen Victoria and Prince Albert were similarly impressed, and purchased a number of pieces from their exhibit, which further encouraged the firm’s popularity. The Victoria and Albert Museum, then known as the South Kensington Museum, purchased its first piece of jewellery from Froment-Meurice at the fair, a bracelet which remains in the collection to this day.

The Renaissance Revival, as seen in the present pendant, and the Gothic Revival were Froment-Meurice’s preferred decorative styles. Historicism was a major design trend of the nineteenth century, encouraged by the Romantic Movement which, among other tenants, idealised times of yore. The Renaissance Revival was one stylistic variant, perhaps first stimulated by the resetting of some of the French Crown Jewels by the Parisian jeweller Bapst to be worn by the Duchess du Berri at her ‘Mary Stuart’ quadrille in 1829. The style was then adopted by Froment-Meurice and his fellow Parisian jeweller Frédéric-Jules Rudolphi (1808-1872) in 1840s and 50s, and then by Jules Wièse (1818-1893), a disciple of the former, whose firm carried the mode through the end of the century. Froment-Meurice’s work in particular is characterised by a focus on fine metalsmithing rather than gems, and a reintroduction of quality enamelling.

Many of the jewellery designs of Froment-Meurice are easily recognized for the use of a central oxidised silver full-length figure or group of figures set into a gold architectural mount, often with enamel accents, and occasionally embellished with gems. His other primary method was to decorate free standing figures entirely in colourful painted enamels. He employed some of the most prominent full-scale sculptors of the day to model the figures. The use of oxidisation, or argent noir as it was called in French, acted to enhance this exceptional sculptural work, as well as to lend the pieces the patina of age.

Instead of copying Gothic and Renaissance jewels directly, like contemporaries such as English designer A.W. Pugin (1812-1852), Froment-Meurice seems to have been much inspired by fifteenth century Italian painting as well as sixteenth century French ecclesiastical sculpture, in which Renaissance figures were retrofitted into Gothic architecture. Though he was the first to integrate them into jewellery, similar designs were found in pattern books of the day, including the Recueil de decorations intérieurs comprenant tout ce qui a rapport a l’ambeublement (1831) by Jacob Petit, a ceramic manufacturer, which, based on similarities to his jewels, Froment-Meurice must have known. Angels, the Virgin and Child, knights, and ladies in period dress were among his most common themes. Another source of inspiration was Renaissance hollowware, such as the famed Cellini salt cellar, which featured attenuated human figures and, when in gold, colourful enamelwork.

The central figure and flanking putti in this piece are identical to those found in one chatelaine and four brooches by Froment-Meurice, the chatelaine in the Stattliche Kunstsammlungen Kassel, and the brooches in the Schmuckmuseum Pforzheim, the Hessisches Landesmuseum Darmstadt, the Birmingham Museum (once part of the famous Anne Hull Grundy collection), and one sold by Sotheby’s London in May 1985. These examples also bear a similar gold and blue enamel architectural mount, and differ only in the surrounding and pendant embellishments. The chatelaine, however, also suspends a small seal fob and watch key as in the present example. Another brooch by Froment-Meurice in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum London, as well as two nearly identical bracelets, one in the Ulf Breede Munich and one in the Musée d’Orsay Paris, feature the same central female figure, this time as an angel with wings, standing in a Gothic style niche, encircled by an oval blue enamelled silver frame.

A design for a brooch identical to the present piece with the exception of the addition of the fleur-de-lis and pendant elements—more similar than any of the examples discussed above—was published in Henri Vever’s La Bijouterie Française au XIXem Siècle (1906-1908), in which it is called the broche renaissance, and dated 1847. The actual manufacture of this design, however, seems likely to have been executed, at least in part, by another Parisian jeweller of great renown, Jules Wièse. The Munich bracelet as well as the Sotheby’s brooch bear the marks of both Froment-Meurice and Wièse;  in the case of the other examples the marks are in varying states of preservation.  Froment-Meurice is known to have contracted other makers to produce parts of his designs, one of whom was Wièse. Wièse began working for Froment-Meurice in 1839, eventually becoming workshop manager.  Though opening his own shop in 1844, Wièse continued to work exclusively for his former firm. He received a medal for his collaboration with Froment-Meurice at the 1849 Paris Exhibition. But by the 1855 Paris Exhibition, held just after the death of Froment-Meurice, Wièse had his own display. Thus it seems probable, based on the design drawing, the two dual marked pieces, and the documentation of their relationship, that this pendant was also a collaboration of the two masters, made sometime between 1847 and 1855.

REFERENCES

Charlotte Gere and Judy Rudoe, Jewellery in the Age of Queen Victoria:  A Mirror to the World, London:  British Museum Press, 2010.

Clare Phillips, Jewels & Jewellery, London:  V&A Publications, 2000.

Diana Scarisbrick, ‘Froment-Meurice’, Apollo Magazine, 14 July 2010.

Frances Wilson and Caroline Crisford, ed.s, The Belle Époque of French Jewellery: 1850-1910, London:  Thomas Heneage & Co. Ltd., 1991.

This unusual double finger signet ring combines elements crafted during both the late eighteenth and late nineteenth centuries, while also incorporating various, more ancient, historical sources in terms of form, materials and decoration. Yet one theme unites each of these components: an association with the Near East, a region which stretched from Egypt to India, and from northern Turkey to the tip of the Arabian Peninsula, all of which was ultimately united by the Islamic religion.

The form—a fixed double shank—is a type which appears to have originated in the ancient Roman Empire, based on a number of extant examples in the British Museum, each also horizontally mounted with three gemstones.  At least two of these examples were unearthed by the famous French collector Louis de Clerq (1836-1901) while working as a photographer on a Ministry of Public Instruction expedition in Syria, which was part of the Roman Empire at the time of the manufacture of these rings. They are now thought to have been used for funerary purposes.

Further to the form, engraved signets have their origins in the heart of this part of the world. The first wearable seals, engraved on cylindrical beads, were used by the ancient Sumerians of Mesopotamia, or present-day Iraq, as early as 5000 BC. Set in rings by the ancient Egyptians, the use of signets continued throughout this region, perhaps the most notable example being that of the Islamic prophet Mohammed (c. 570-632 AD), who is recorded as wearing a silver and hardstone signet engraved ‘Mohammed rasûl Allah’, meaning ‘Mohammed the Apostle of God’.  According to Jean-BaptisteTavernier (1605-1689 AD), French pioneer of the gem trade between East and West, the sultans of the Ottoman Empire wore signets engraved with their names.  Seal rings with Arabic inscriptions continued to be worn into the nineteenth century, eventually becoming fashionable in Europe and America.  George Frederick Kunz (1856-1932), prominent jewellery and mineral scholar and Chief Gemmologist at Tiffany & Co., is known to have worn a signet ring inscribed with his name in Arabic, made for him in Tehran in 1895.

The gemstones set in this ring also relate directly to the Near East.  The emerald is engraved with the words ‘Salam Allah’ in Arabic script, meaning ‘Peace to Allah’, and with the Arabic date 1211, or 1790 in the Western calendar. The tradition of engraving emeralds with Arabic inscriptions first emerged in the western Indian subcontinent during the Mogul Empire (1526-1857 AD).  These successive courts obtained some of the largest and most important emeralds ever discovered, primarily from Columbia, and engraved the stones with Islamic prayers, perhaps the most famous being the aptly named “Mogul Emerald” carved in 1695 and weighing 217.80 carats. Inscriptions of this type, conveniently for scholars, traditionally include a date. The pearls in this ring are too a link to this same geographic and religious background, specifically the Persian Gulf. This body of water was the preeminent historical source for pearls, with the earliest recorded pearling undertaken in the third millennium BC by the aforementioned Sumerians. Pliny the Elder (23-79 AD), Roman historian and naturalist, in his Natural History, remarked that the finest pearls in the world came from the Persian Gulf. The Gulf pearl industry thrived until the early twentieth century, its demise brought about by both the invention of cultured pearls and the discovery of oil.

Created nearly a century after the carved emerald, the ring mount is decorated in the ‘Saracenic’ style, completing the intertwined geographic and religious theme. ‘Saracenic’ was a nineteenth century term which encompassed the various decorative styles of the Islamic cultures of the Middle East and North Africa, though its root—‘Saracen’—was the Ancient Roman name applied specifically to the pre-Islamic nomadic people of the Syrian-Arabian desserts. During the late nineteenth century Western art and design was largely dominated by a fascination with the East, which included, in addition to the Middle East and India, China and Japan. One derivation of this Orientalism was the Saracenic style, characterized by dense symmetrical patterns of stylized foliate forms found in the medieval architecture and decorative arts of the Eastern Mediterranean. This particular pattern, with its symmetrical stylized foliate scrollwork, is highly similar to decoration found on a carved wood panel in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, once part of the pulpit of a mosque in Cairo, made in 1296. The panel was exhibited in the museum upon its purchase, as well as at the Exposition Universelle in Paris in 1878, in addition to being published in Art of the Saracens in Egypt (1886) by Stanley Lane-Poole.  Such exhibitions and publications are known to have been used as sources of inspiration for designers, including those working in the jewellery industry.

It is clear that the designer took great care in the conception of this ring, made possible by exposure to a number of important collections and resources allowing for highly specific historical references, the compilation of which unite in this tour de force of the Saracenic style. The complex interplay of these decorative elements, along with the rarity of form and quality of both materials and manufacture, make this ring a highly important example of late nineteenth century Orientalist design.

REFERENCES

George Frederick Kunz, Rings for the Finger, New York:  Dover Publications Inc., 1917.

Signet rings have been in use for millennia, with some of the earliest extant examples originating in Ancient Egypt. Seal rings incorporating heraldic devices and initials, however, did not appear until the medieval period in Europe.  The present ring is an example of this early form of initialled signet, and is much like a number of British rings in the collections of both the Victoria and Albert Museum and the British museum.

In the late fourteenth century there appears to have been a change in taste with regards to signet rings, from those set with hardstone intaglios carved with Classical figures, to those with large metal bezels engraved with the owner’s initials, usually enclosed in a rope or dot border and surrounded by foliate or symbolic ornaments. The earliest initials rings were typically in bronze or silver, and were used by the middle to lower classes whose business required frequent authentication of documents. In the fifteenth century, however, rings of this type were adopted by the aristocracy, and so heraldic as well as initial rings were rendered in gold for these purposes.  Large gold double initial rings such as this one became especially fashionable in the second half of the sixteenth century. Uses varied, as is demonstrated by the diverse provenances associated with the few known examples.  A highly similar ring bearing the initials “HM” tied with a love knot once belonged to Lord Darnley (1545-1567), the second husband of Mary, Queen of Scots (1552-1587), and was made for their marriage in 1565. Another ring of the same type and decoration but with the initials “WS” is thought to have belonged to the most famous of poets, William Shakespeare (1564-1616)—likely commercial rather than nuptial in purpose. Other rings of this date and form are linked to merchants, such as one, again very similar to the present piece, depicted in a portrait of Gamaliel Pye (d. 1596), a Londoner and five times Warden of the Worshipful Company of Butchers. In this last example, we are fortunate to be able to see exactly how this ring was worn, at least by one owner–on the index finger of the left hand.

The decoration of the present ring is a further testament to its sophistication. Above and below the initials are two stylized foliate swags in the grotesque style of the Italian Renaissance. Inspired by the decoration of Nero’s Domus Aurea (Golden House) in Rome, built in the first century AD and rediscovered in the late fifteenth century, it was at the forefront of fashion at this time, and was first brought to England via Italian artisans commissioned by Henry VIII.  The decoration on the shoulders, known as strapwork, is another variant of the grotesque, embraced more so in the Mannerist period which directly followed the Renaissance. First introduced by the Italian designer Rosso Fiorentino in (1494-1540) in his designs for the palace of Fontainebleau for Francois 1ier of France, the motif was then spread throughout Northern Europe by way of Flemish and German printmakers in the 1560s. Based on both the decoration and the provenance of other rings of this exact form, this ring is certainly a rare and important relic of sixteenth century British history.

REFERENCES

Charles Oman, British Rings:  800-1914, London:  B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1974.

Diana Scarisbrick, Rings:  Jewelry of Power, Love and Loyalty, London:  Thames and Hudson, 2007.

Art Deco continues to be one of the most collectable periods in vintage jewelry. This trend is in large part due to the rarity of such pieces, as a great number of Art Deco jewels were broken up during the Great Depression and, then, World War II.  The economic circumstances surrounding these two events also contributed to a major change in jewelry fashion in the following decades, turning from platinum jewels set with a multitude of diamonds to designs more heavily focused on large, hollow yellow gold pieces sparingly punctuated with gemstones. It was only in the 1980s that the Art Deco style experienced a renaissance, the opulence of materials and streamlined styling a perfect match for the luxuriant decade.

Despite the present economic climate, demand for Art Deco jewelry continues unabated, for reasons evident upon examining any fine Art Deco piece. This brooch, dating circa 1925, is characteristic of the Art Deco style in many respects. Perhaps the most striking feature is the use of bold geometric forms—curved silhouettes juxtaposed with straight, and square with circular forms—in line with the modernist tastes of the era. Also bold are the color contrasts, executed with the traditional Art Deco gemstones and metals, here in platinum and diamonds played against black onyx and bright green emeralds.  This particular combination recalls decorative arts of the Far East, one of the most important influences on Art Deco designers. The use of lavish materials is also typical of the period, reflecting the economic prosperity of the 1920s. Textural contrast is also rendered by way of gemstone cuts—flat baguette cut onyxes, smooth cabochon emeralds, and glittering, multi-faceted brilliant cut diamonds—which all work together to lend an added lushness.

Unsurprisingly, prices for Art Deco jewels continue to climb. For more on the Art Deco jewelry market see this recent article in The New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/arts/21iht-acajdeco.html

This Burmese ruby and diamond ring was made by Raymond Yard, one of America’s premier jewelers, during what is now referred to as the firm’s “classic period”, beginning in the late 1920’s. It was at this time that Yard established himself with the American elite, including barons of industry such as John D. Rockefeller, Henry DuPont and Henry Flagler, and celebrities, like Joan Crawford and Douglas Fairbanks.  It was also when Yard’s own distinctive style emerged, this ring embodying all that made the firm a success.

First and foremost, only the finest colored stones were selected for Yard jewelry—sapphires from Kashmir and rubies, as in this example, from Burma—which were carefully cut for maximum depth of color. Highly polished platinum settings using a minimum of metal, which created the illusion that the gems are floating in air, became another Yard trademark.  Also seen in this ring, Yard utilized contrasting gemstone cuts, playing simple step cuts against sparkling brilliants, which lent his jewels an added lushness.

As for the overall design, this ring is typical of Yard’s early Art Deco rings, with a center stone that blends seamlessly with the shoulders and the shank, in one unified contour. Yard rings of this period combined the Edwardian taste for intricate workmanship—delicate piercing and millegraining– with the Art Deco taste for bold contrast, as seen here in the play of pure red rubies against white diamonds and platinum, and in the various straight and curvilinear geometric forms.

Finally, each piece was executed to the height of perfection, as Yard believed that even the slightest flaw greatly diminished the beauty of a piece of jewelry. To this day Yard’s combination of faultless quality and ingenious design is unsurpassed, and his particular brand of restrained luxuriance continues to be treasured.

REFERENCES

Natasha Kuzmanovic, Yard:  The Life and Magnificent Jewelry of Raymond C. Yard, Vendome, 2007.

Female stars at the 2010 Academy Awards, the unchallenged fashion event of the year, displayed a definite trend in their choice of jewellery: diamond bracelets. Nearly every major actress was wearing some form of diamond set jewel around her wrist, whether it was wide or skinny, on its own or layered, monochromatic or set with coloured stones. The preeminent woman of the night, Best Actress award winner Sandra Bullock wore a diamond line bracelet punctuated with circular diamond set links. Diane Kruger, who played in the Oscar-nominated film Inglourious Basterds wore a simple diamond tennis bracelet, though composed of quite large stones. The ever trend-setting Sarah Jessica Parker wore a number of slim diamond bracelets piled high on one arm, including a diamond rivière necklace that had been looped around the wrist. Demi Moore, Charlize Theron, Mariah Carey, and ingénue Amanda Seyfriend all wore wide diamond bracelets, many dating from the Art Deco era. Maggie Gyllenhaal, one of the nominees for Best Supporting Actress, wore a different style on each wrist, one of which was an Art Deco diamond bracelet set with a large carved emerald and further accented with cabochon sapphires, and the other a yellow gold and diamond Retro cuff.

View the jewels on http://www.thefashionspot.com/featured-stories/news/81334-oscars-2010-fashion-recap

Figural jewellery—jewellery in the form of human or animal figures—has been made for millennia. Jewels of this kind were fashioned by the Mesopotamians as early as 3000 BC, and were likely used as amulets, or symbolic objects of protective function. Examples also originate from ancient Egyptian, Greek, Etruscan, Roman, Celtic, Chinese, and South and Central American cultures. Figural jewellery is categorized into two types, either with figures in the round, or with figures set against a background. Rings in particular lend themselves to designs of the first category, with full figures making up the shank of the ring.

In the modern age, figural jewellery, very often rings due to the suitability of the form, became fashionable in Europe during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, particularly in France, Italy, and Germany. An evolution of their ancient amuletic use, Renaissance figural jewels often displayed a theme or told a story, frequently Biblical or mythological. Albercht Dürer, the famous Renaissance German artist, is known to have designed rings of this type. Many figural rings from this period incorporated gemstones, as seen in designs for rings by Pierre Woeiriot, a French artist and goldsmith, dating from 1561.

Figural rings became popular again in the latter half of the nineteenth century, first in the guise of various revivalist styles, including the Gothic, Classical, Egyptian and Renaissance modes. Gothic revival style rings integrated full length figures of angels and saints. Sphinxes, pharaohs, and serpents can be found in Egyptian revival style rings, and Greco-Roman gods and nymphs in Classical revival style works, both drawing on ancient examples. Rings in these two styles were regularly set with intaglios, which again were inspired by their ancient counterparts. Renaissance revival designs largely mimicked the human and mythological forms of the Renaissance originals discussed above.

Around the turn of the twentieth century jewellers working in the Art Nouveau style embraced the use of the human form, especially nudes. These rings, like the original Renaissance jewels, were often allegorically themed. They are distinctive from the earlier revivalist figural rings in their swirling, intertwined designs, so characteristic of the Art Nouveau.

Whatever their age, ancient to antique, figural rings allow the wearer to bear not only a piece of beautiful jewellery, but also a piece of sculptural art, and as well as a myth.

REFERENCES

Diana Scarisbrick, Rings:  Jewelry of Power, Love and Loyalty, Thames and Hudson, 2007.

Hugh Tait, 7000 Years of Jewellery, The British Museum Press, 2006.

One of the most collectable makers of antique jewellery is the London house of Giuliano, founded by the Neapolitan-born Carlo Giuliano, and succeeded by his sons Carlo and Arthur Alphonse. Though unmarked, this piece is likely to have once been a part of a tiara or hair ornament made by Giuliano due to its similarity to other signed pieces by the firm. There are five known pieces, in addition to the present jewel, by Giuliano which are comprised of a pair of diamond set wings with a larger stone or stones placed at centre. All five—a convertible hair ornament/brooch, a tiara, and three brooches—appeared in Wartski’s 1989 exhibition Artists’ Jewellery: Pre-Raphaelite to Arts and Crafts, and additionally two of these five are featured in the book of the same title by Charlotte Gere and Geoffrey Munn. The present piece is most similar to the diamond hair ornament with removable brooch, which is signed ‘C & AG,’ and in a fitted Giuliano box. The most obvious differences are the detachable hair comb, signature, and fitted box. The format of the brooches, however, are highly similar, both with pavé set diamond wings and two opposing pear shaped diamonds set at centre, the number of stones and exact placements only varying slightly. Wartski generously confirms authentication of the brooch to the Giuliano firm, being that the piece was at one time in their possession, as is indicted by its current fitted Wartski box.

As it is unmarked, the question yet remains as to whether the brooch was produced under the tenure of the father or the sons. Of the five other known winged Giuliano pieces mentioned above, four are marked ‘C & AG,’ the mark of Carlo and Arthur, who ran the shop from 1895 until 1914; the remaining winged jewel is unmarked. Therefore, due to the similarity with the brooch portion of the diamond hair ornament marked ‘C & AG,’ as well as the other three signed winged pieces also marked ‘C & AG,’ it seems reasonable to conclude that the present piece dates from the era of the sons.

Regarding the design itself, winged brooches set with large central stones were popular in the latter part of the nineteenth century, due in large part to a revival of Ancient Egyptian motifs. This image appears frequently in Ancient Egyptian iconography, though in a highly linear form. The original symbol was composed of a pair of wings extending from a central orb, oftentimes incorporating a pair of serpents, the three elements together representing the holy trinity of Ancient Egyptian gods. The aforementioned winged Giuliano tiara relates strongly to this emblem, with an ovoid star ruby set at the centre of the wings, all supported by twin serpents. Though some European designers stayed true to the authentic linearity in their Ancient Egyptian-inspired jewels—such as the famous jeweller Fortunato Pio Castellani, with whom the senior Giuliano trained–many also freely adapted the format, as was done in these Giuliano pieces, with their angelic, undulating wings. Giuliano also sometimes modified the original symbolism of the form, and attached a completely different meaning to another of their winged jewels. Set with a cabochon sapphire between diamond and enamel wings, this brooch was commissioned as a birthday gift, and, according to an original note, the wings were to represent ‘the flight of time.’ Other jewellers of the period also took up the format, often adapting it with a heart-shaped centre stone, or omitting the central element entirely. Today diamond wing jewellery is still extremely fashionable, as is demonstrated by the popularity of Garrard’s diamond ‘Wing’ collection, a testament to the timeless style of this important antique jewel.

REFERENCES

Charlotte Gere and Geoffrey C. Munn, Artists’ Jewellery: Pre-Raphaelite to Arts and Crafts, p. 147-151.