Eh… help 
I’m pretty sure it’s Jane popovitch .
4 Likes
Thank You.
I couldn’t tell it was a JP until I saw both replies.
Appreciate the help.
This isn’t Jane Popovitch altho the hallmarks are similar. This is Pacific Jewelry which was a factory that made “tourist” jewelry (not Native made). Part of the tip off is the way it is constructed in the back. This is one case where the hallmark site has it wrong.
6 Likes
@JW is correct, this mark is for Pacific Jewelry Company, which is often confused with Navajo artist, Jane Popovich. The circular rivets are they key that this is not a handmade item.
7 Likes
Thank You, Learned something new. Appreciate everyone’s help 
2 Likes
And I stand corrected. I made that mistake before so maybe this time I’ll remember. Thanks to you and JW.
1 Like
Thank You for the correction JW and Bigbree43. I learned something and have added this info to my Identification Folder for future reference.
3 Likes
I’m a little confused now, nothing new 
tarafawns ring shows a rivet and a conjoined JP that is agreed to be a pacific jewelry mark.
the art-amerindian site shows a conjoined JP attributed to Jane Yikaazba Popovich Navajo and is wrong?
I am seeing a small detail that sets these 2 marks apart aside from the obvious rivets.
can somebody upload an example from a Hougart book for us confused peeps?
3 Likes
I made this a while ago, maybe this can help some folks. In order to distinguish the Ukestine’s work from Popovich’s, you will have to look and compare overall styles. But PJC will always have rivets, prefabricated shanks, bezel cups, repeating designs, calibrated turquoise stones, etc…
7 Likes
outstanding!
in my scouring of the examples out there on the net I found some WHOPPERS on ebay etsy poshmark etc.
buyer bidder collector BEWARE
6 Likes
When i was researching this hallmark in my free time, I would say that almost 95% of the jewelry for sale on eBay that is attributed to Jane Popovich is incorrect. It’s all manufactured by PJC!
6 Likes
Thanks Bree, You Rock!
1 Like