Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

CaptainMacMillan t1_iwyuo8h wrote

So really it’s only worth 4x more than a high end engagement ring

268

True_Trueno t1_iwyx353 wrote

A gold medieval ring wedding mud in the found worth is thousands.

334

Hahanohahanohaha t1_iwzdah6 wrote

>"There will probably never be another one like it," Board told CNN.

I have a sneaking suspicion there might be at least one more like it, but maybe I'm just being a whacky goofball

75

jjjam t1_iwziwhl wrote

I'm very suspicious of this, especially the suggestion that it is from 1388, which might make it the oldest diamond wedding band ever, as some sources suggest diamond wedding bands began being made in the early 1400s. (and that it is being evaluated by an auction house and not an archaeologist. Also, that it was found in Britain and is being auctioned and not being preserved, as you have to report all finds there and presumably a museum would be interested in the oldest known diamond wedding band.)

23

Thebluefairie t1_iwzjcvx wrote

That looks like a crown of thorns and with that inscription "ieo vos tien foi tenes le moy" — or "I hold your faith, hold mine" I think that it is intended to be

60

superskidrow t1_iwzjvst wrote

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

27

pernologos84 t1_iwzkt1a wrote

Funny. What if she lost it wandering around the country and remained there for almost 700 years.

24

wygrif t1_iwzn21u wrote

$47,000 is surprisingly low for a 600 year old object in "perfect" condition. That's less than some magic cards FFS

201

quirkycurlygirly t1_iwzpq47 wrote

Some poor peasant woman was pulling up carrots and lost her most prized possession, then searched the garden in vain her whole life to find it. 'Someone's found your ring, Love. We'll honor it for you.'

5

KingoftheMongoose t1_iwzsoyf wrote

Replying to Letmefadeaway (#580,043)

OP’s post title is grammatically incorrect due to word misplacement; so we are having a fun jest at OP’s expense by jumbling their words up further to make even more nonsensical titles.

Moral of story: proofread or end up with Titlegore jokes!

8

Alc2005 t1_iwztf6f wrote

This post was sandwiched between two lotrmemes posts. Had to do a double take at first

32

Severe-Kumquat t1_iwzvdmw wrote

Trying to read this title gave me the black plague.

21

Fmanow t1_ix06ski wrote

I’m surprised he was able to part with his precious.

4

HandsOnGeek t1_ix08zvz wrote

Replying to hotlikebea (#581,459)

A flak jacket is not just a jacket. Flak is in fact the explosive shrapnel-generating anti-aircraft cannon fire that was used to defend cities from flights of bombers in World War II. A flak jacket is what you wear to protect yourself from that shrapnel.

So the flak jacket is the modernish to antique equivalent of a middle ages suit of armor.

−11

Jacob216216 t1_ix0abyu wrote

“And some things that should not have been forgotten were lost."

9

Lord_Ezkaton t1_ix0iiy7 wrote

Replying to jjjam (#579,263)

It matches closely with known typologies of rings (particularly of stirrup-shaped type) from the period of the 14th to 15th centuries. Also the Black Letter script helps date it to this period too.

And yep, the ring was reported and recorded as part of the UK's Treasure legislation and recorded by the local Finds Liaison Officer. The issue may have been that a museum was interested in acquiring the object, BUT the Treasure Valuation Committee price was too high and the museum pulled out, thus meaning the object was then disclaimed and returned to the finder.

12

neighbor_jim t1_ix0ixno wrote

Wedding ring antique gold is this, hmm?

0

Miskatonic_River t1_ix0obg9 wrote

Replying to beanakajulian33 (#581,375)

Yes. In contrast to the other Rings of Power, the One Ring bore no gems while the Lady Brook Medieval Diamond Ring has a diamond set in a bezel. Furthermore, the One Ring was famously destroyed in the fires of Mount Doom at the end of the Third Age.

67

Surgeboy99 t1_ix0qf7k wrote

Replying to quirkycurlygirly (#579,839)

>acquired by Henry de Broc (or de la Brook) from Reginald de Mohun (1206–1258), Feudal baron of Dunster in Somerset, who had inherited this land from his first wife Hawise Fleming, daughter and heiress of William Fleming. It then passed by descent through the Brook family, coming into the possession of the wealthy landowner Sir Thomas Brook (c.1355-1418). Due to the exceptionally fine quality of this ring, it was, quite possibly, the wedding ring given by Sir Thomas Brook to his wife Lady Joan Brook for their marriage in 1388

7

panckage t1_ix0r1z1 wrote

She must have been pissed when she lost the ring. Imagine if she lost it on her wedding night!

2

abominabot t1_ix0whdi wrote

Replying to beanakajulian33 (#581,375)

No way. Isildur was attacked and lost the ring hundreds of years ago. Its probably at the bottom of some river, hidden in the mud. Seems very unlikely some random guy would just find it

33

d-arden t1_ix0zaaf wrote

From now on I’m measuring everything in Mud Worth

4

MKVIgti t1_ix1leu3 wrote

This is so damn cool.

Blows me away how people accomplished so much with tools they had to create and processes they had to create as well. The craftsmanship is incredible and I’m glad these rings have been discovered so we can see and enjoy them.

3

Swiggy1957 t1_ix1lilw wrote

Replying to big_tom (#581,230)

Ah, but the rarity of this ring is that it is GOLD.

This was at a time when gold was, well, worth it's weight in gold. The only ones that could afford a gold ring were those of wealth: nobility, royalty, high ranking church and military members, and, of course, rich merchants. Wedding rings of that era were often made iof Iron so they wouldn't be destroyed when the lady of the house cleaned, cooked and did other various chores around the place.

6

_deedas t1_ix1ntsm wrote

I would imagine most gold wedding rings would be worth thousands. Dunno for sure, what's the price of gold now day?

2

AbbreviationsGlad833 t1_ix1tkdz wrote

Must be nice to be a metal detectorist in Europe. Oldest things I find if im lucky is rusty iron things maybe from the colonial era.

3

CordeliaGrace t1_ix21yn4 wrote

Replying to Thebluefairie (#579,305)

It says the inscription is French too. I’m wondering if I could replace the foi with coeur and still have it grammatically be accurate? So it would say “i hold your heart, hold mine”.

3

HungryCats96 t1_ix2bs90 wrote

I'm surprised it's not worth more, for its historical value, if not for the materials and craftmanship.

2

its_justme t1_ix2gvdm wrote

Replying to BeautifulStranger80s (#587,343)

“Ok big S, just stay calm. World domination is in your grasp, just don’t look too needy. Also don’t spend more than 1 mil, you’ve already taken out a reverse mortgage against barad dur and you can’t dodge Saruman’s calls forever”

3

anfuman t1_ix2tkuy wrote

How do we know it’s wedding ring?

1

Jjex22 t1_ix2vcjd wrote

Replying to wygrif (#579,610)

It’s still a fair old chunk of change, and doesn’t have a cool story attached to it. It’s worth a lot more than the gold it’s made of, but there’s also a lot of 600 year old things in the UK.

Special but not so special basically.

1

ContentsMayVary t1_ix2zew2 wrote

According to the Treasure Act 1996 this ring would be classified as treasure, and thus the finder would be compelled to first offer it for sale to a museum ("that belongs in a museum"). Only if no museum wants to buy it can it go on general sale.

This ring would fall under the definition:

>Any individual (non-coin) find that is at least 300 years old and contains at least 10% gold or silver.

None of this is mentioned in the article, which makes me think some information is missing... It's possible that no musem wanted to buy it at £40K.

1

LazyLich t1_ix383ic wrote

Replying to Aozora404 (#587,111)

Yeah but the specific GROUPING of particles wasn't.

Like, yeah human tribes have existed for thousands of years, but the group "America" has only been around for a couple hundred.

1

Son_of_Kong t1_ix63lom wrote

Replying to EZpeeeZee (#585,512)

The lore answer is that there's no more unified force of evil, but Morgoth's last act was to infuse his essence in the earth, which is why sin and corruption still exist.

2