Skip to content
The Office is Open: Call Us: 416-366-3335 | 27 Queen St E, #1011, Toronto

Cart

Your cart is empty

British Birthstone List

British Birthstone List

The National Association of Goldsmiths' calendar and its divergence from American convention

Birthstones, anniversaries & careView in dictionary · 620 words

The British birthstone list is the calendar of monthly gemstone assignments maintained by the National Association of Goldsmiths (NAG), the principal trade body representing jewellers in the United Kingdom. Although broadly similar to the modern American list codified by the Jewelers of America in 1912 and revised periodically since, the NAG list preserves several divergences that reflect distinctly European historical preferences. It remains the reference standard among UK jewellers and is occasionally consulted in Commonwealth markets where American trade-body lists carry less authority.

Historical context

The practice of assigning gemstones to calendar months has roots in biblical and classical antiquity — the twelve stones of the High Priest's breastplate described in Exodus and the twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem in Revelation were both interpreted, by the first century CE, as corresponding to the signs of the zodiac and, later, to calendar months. The modern Western birthstone tradition, however, is largely a product of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when jewellers in Poland, Germany, and Britain began marketing stones tied to birth months as personal talismans. The American list of 1912 standardised this practice for the US trade, but British jewellers, working within their own commercial and cultural context, maintained a parallel list that had evolved through European convention rather than a single trade-body decree.

Where the British list differs

For the majority of months the two lists agree, sharing stones such as garnet for January, amethyst for February, aquamarine for March, diamond for April, emerald for May, pearl for June, peridot for August, sapphire for September, opal for October, and turquoise or topaz for November and December in various formulations. The notable divergences in the NAG list are:

  • July — onyx, rather than ruby. Ruby is the near-universal assignment for July in American and international lists; the NAG list's retention of onyx for this month is one of its most distinctive features, reflecting an older European lapidary tradition in which black or banded chalcedony held symbolic significance for midsummer.
  • November — citrine, rather than topaz. Both stones share a warm golden-yellow palette, and citrine's assignment here is consistent with a broader European preference for the quartz variety over precious topaz in this position.
  • December — lapis lazuli, rather than turquoise, tanzanite, or blue topaz. The American list has accumulated three December stones over successive revisions (turquoise in 1912, tanzanite added in 2002, blue topaz also recognised). The NAG list's preference for lapis lazuli aligns with a long European tradition in which the deep-blue Afghan stone — prized since antiquity and prominent in medieval and Renaissance jewellery — was considered the pre-eminent blue gem of winter.

Status in the contemporary trade

The NAG list does not receive the same degree of consumer-facing promotion as the American Gem Trade Association (AGTA) or Jewelers of America lists, which benefit from coordinated marketing campaigns in the United States. Nevertheless, it retains practical relevance: UK jewellers referencing birthstones in catalogues, hallmarking literature, and customer consultations will typically use the NAG assignments. In Commonwealth markets — Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand — practice varies; some retailers follow the American list for its greater international recognition, while others, particularly those with British-trained staff or heritage, adhere to the NAG version.

The differences between the lists are a useful reminder that birthstone assignments are cultural and commercial conventions rather than gemmological facts. No physical property of ruby makes it inherently more suited to July than onyx; the distinction lies entirely in the historical and institutional context in which each list was compiled.

Further reading