Odd, Apparently unpapered, Roman Intaglio with Quadriga and Quirky Style

This one has a lot of cap-lock shouting in it.

                                       Ring                                    

ANCIENT ROMAN HIGH CARAT GOLD RING WITH CARNELIAN INTAGLIO SUPERB “Good condition for age” Price: £1,700.00 Buy it now £25.00 Expedited Delivery. Seller antiques-and-artefacts-uk (18919) [MD ANTIQUITIES LTD Michael Davies] 99.7% positive Feedback 80K items sold Located in: Didcot, United Kingdom.
Provenance FROM AN OLD INTERNATIONAL COLLECTION

 
Well, 80k that's a lot, innit? I'm not too happy about that "provenance" what does it mean "international"? What about "old"? Last year, last decade, generation, century? Grand Tour period? How can Mr Davies document that, and if he can, why is that documentation not mentioned in the sales offer? Or is this item being sold without paperwork? If it was held in a foreign collection, or items found in another country, did it need an export licence to legally export it? If it did not, how can that be demonstrated when the country of origin and date of export are not mentioned? And if it did need an export licence, where is that document?

 
This is all very important, because on the same day as we are reading this, there is a story in several national newspapers (which I bet they can get in DIDCOT too) about a guy accused of selling off small items of jewellery that it is alleged were taken from a museum store. In cases like this they too are labelled with the generic "from an old [ ] collection" like Mr Davies is using here. A buyer is perfectly entitled to ask the seller to provide the details and proof to avoid any risk of having stolen property on their hands. That is what we call "due diligence" - anything else is irresponsible collecting.

Another caveaty-emptory area is in authenticity, somebody is asked to fork out £1.7k for this little trinket. Mr Davies assures: OUR ITEMS ARE ALL GENUINE AS DESCRIBED AND DESCRIBED TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY BY OUR IN HOUSE TEAM THAT HAS MANY MANY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD. Those experts are not named, nor is the area where they have that "experience". Colours on monitors vary, but if the ring is the colour the photos seem to be suggesting, that vague "high carat" really needs substantiating by a non-destructive analysis. I am also puzzled by the form, why does the twisted beaded edge of the hoop go inside and under the bezel? Why are there reserved cells inside the hoop, reducing its thickness and strength? Why is the bezel so crudely soldered to the hoop? I'd like to see the experts go to a bit more effort to provide some analogies to these odd features, not very common on fingerings, especially ones as elaborate as this one is supposed to be. The edges of the hoop have sharp projecting edges, in no place is there any damage from wearing such a ring (which my guess is would actually be blinking uncomfortable), neither on the front and edges of the bezel. Yet the edges of the stone set into this "high carat" mount are very extensively battered. Was this a ring made up specifically for placing on the finger of a corpse that was then buried? I think Mr Davies should say.

Now we are told "PLEASE NOTE SOME ITEMS HAVE MINOR RESTORATION/REPAIRS AND THIS SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN MAKING A PURCHASE. PLEASE ASK IF UNSURE, SO THERE IS NO CONFUSION BETWEEN US" if I were thinking of buying this, I hope somebody would give me the advice to ask the seller outright whether that gem is original, or a replacement. I do not like the harsh style of cutting, and the toolmarks in particular. They do not look much like the ones on excavated gems that archaeologists handle (so once again, where was this "experience" gained?). The experts do not say what the stone is, nor what the subject is, its a quadriga driven by a driver with a radiate crown - perhaps the sun-god Helios, Phaethon or Sol (?).