Will Jennifer Aniston keep the cloudy, quartz-y engagement ring Justin gave her?

London photocall for 'Red Sparrow'

I’m genuinely enjoying all of the vintage gossip around the Justin Theroux-Jennifer Aniston split. Part of it is that I just enjoy nostalgia, especially gossip nostalgia. Also I genuinely forgot some of this stuff! Like, it took me hours to remember that Justin Theroux used to have a bald spot back in 2011 and now he doesn’t. I forgot how Justin ALWAYS wore jorts when they vacationed in Cabo. And I forgot how much everyone hated Jennifer’s giant quartz-looking engagement ring, and I forgot how she hid the ring for months.

Justin and Jennifer got engaged in August 2012 when he (allegedly!) proposed on HIS birthday. It was October before we saw the ring, and we saw the ring because Jennifer and Justin posed for a paparazzo in Santa Fe, New Mexico – those are the photos I’m re-using in this post, because lordy, they were super-posed. Even back then, I questioned everything about the ring, because it didn’t look like a real diamond, and the setting and everything just made it seem like a cloudy, quartz-y cocktail ring rather than a diamond engagement ring. If you want to have a quartz engagement ring, so be it – there are some really pretty quartz rings! But Jen’s PR tried to convince people that Justin had shelled out millions of dollars on this “diamond” ring. And very few people bought it, and I suspect even fewer people believe it now. Well, here’s the good news…? Jennifer gets to keep the quartz!

In the wake of the news of Jennifer Aniston and Justin Theroux’s separation after two and a half years of marriage, the former couple now face the unpleasant task of having to divide their assets and shared property. But what about Aniston’s huge diamond engagement ring?

“The engagement ring pre-dates the marriage, and therefore is Jennifer’s separate property regardless of whether it is mentioned in the prenuptial agreement,” says L.A.-based attorney and certified family law specialist David Glass, who’s not involved with Aniston and Theroux’s split. “As long as the parties get married, then the recipient keeps the engagement ring.”

Aniston previously told the New York Times that the huge diamond sparkler, estimated at around eight carats, took some getting used to.

“It’s a rock, I know,” she admitted. “He rocked it up. It took me a while to get used to it. I’m not a diamond girl,” she added. I’m more Indian jewelry and stuff.”

The couple became engaged on Aug. 10, 2012 after more than a year of dating. Theroux popped the question on his birthday and Aniston was photographed wearing the rock in question nearly two months later when Theroux visited her on the Santa Fe set of We’re the Millers. The couple announced their separation last Thursday.

[From People]

People Mag has more in that article about how the division of assets will probably look. As we know, Jennifer had a good pre-nup, and I’m pretty sure her assets are covered, and almost everything was just in her name alone. Maybe the Bel Air mansion was in both of their names, which is why she’s unloading it now – they’ll sell it and divide the profits and that will be his “settlement.” I still believe that he’s probably angling for a bigger payday though, the kind of payday that comes with a signed non-disclosure agreement. I hope the quartz makes her happy! (It never made her happy – she only wore that ring half the time in public, if that.)

2015 Vanity Fair Oscar Party

Horrible Bosses 2 - World premiere

Life of Crime - TIFF 2013 Red Carpet Arrival

Photos courtesy of Jason Thomas/Filmmagic and WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

86 Responses to “Will Jennifer Aniston keep the cloudy, quartz-y engagement ring Justin gave her?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Juliette says:

    I don’t like that ring. It’s too big.

  2. kimbers says:

    use it to bedazzle something and call it good.

  3. OriginalLala says:

    After a certain size, diamond rings just start looking like something you’d buy at Claire’s Accessories for 12$.

  4. tracking says:

    There is a closeup of the ring with the People article, and the stone is actually quite lovely. I really like that old-fashioned rose cut style, though it’s true it doesn’t sparkle as much. But, yeah, she’s too tiny for that gargantuan stone. I can’t even imagine resetting it. She should just sell it. As for the house, I remember reading a long time ago that he contributed 500K to its purchase. I suspect she paid for his apartment reno, so maybe they’ll call it even.

    • Carmen says:

      If it’s a rose cut, then the clarity is really poor. I understand rose cuts don’t have the same sparkle as more modern cuts, but I’ve seen better looking rings than that in a gumball machine. She went for quantity over quality. She had to have something bigger than Angie’s six carat emerald cut ring. So she went two carats bigger. And of course she should keep it, since she almost certainly bought and paid for it.

      I’m much more interested as to whether or not they actually got married in the first place. It’s four days now and the missing marriage license still hasn’t turned up. I can see Huvane now desperately trying to dummy up some realistic-looking certificate.

      • Jussie says:

        She’s worth over 200 million. If she wanted to out-do Angelina’s ring with something she bought herself she could have bought a massive and exquisite stone that was noticeably better than the one Pitt bought and barely dented her bank balance.

        She was pretty clear the ring wasn’t her style and she didn’t even wear it much. Why would she buy herself something she didn’t like?

      • tracking says:

        I think Justin went for quantity over quality, the best he could afford. I doubt it’s worth 500K. Especially since he proposed fairly early on in their relationship, he might have been feeling the pressure of the Pitt comparisons.

      • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

        I don’t think it’s a clarity issue. I think the rose cut does not provide the same degree of refraction that we are used to with modern cuts ( think Hearts on Fire brilliant cut). Here’s one nice photo:

      • jensays says:

        I just found out about these California confidential marriage licenses a few months ago from my aunt who got “secret married” in SF last summer.


        In other words, JA and JT could have gotten married but their license may never see the light of day (no matter how much digging TMZ does… although, they have people EVERYWHERE!!!). I think its a cool feature (the license) that not a lot of other states offer. I wonder why more Hollywood-types don’t do this.

      • Algernon says:

        My e-ring isn’t nearly that big but I have a “raw” diamond ring and it’s similarly cloudy. I always assumed she had a raw diamond, which is cut but unpolished so it doesn’t sparkle, but it does emit a lovely, soft glow. I never really examined her ring so I didn’t notice it is rose cut, so it’s not really “raw” (which is supposed to be unshaped), but it still has that unpolished look.

      • Carmen says:

        @jensays: if I read that article correctly, a confidential license means the license is not available for inspection except by court order, but it doesn’t mean there is no record it exists. It’s like. “We have it on file, but unless you get a court order, we can’t show it to you or tell you anything about what it says.”

        If a confidential license exists, you would expect someone in Aniston’s camp to come forward and say so by now. It’s been five days since TMZ posted that story that they may not have been legally married, and since then, there has not been a word of denial.

    • Psu Doh Nihm says:

      It also flouresces blue hence the reason it looks milky under certain lighting.

  5. sumire says:

    Jennifer`s hand is so old!!! LOL

    • mia girl says:

      Meh, you can mock now, but we all get there.

      • momE says:

        Thanks. Consider yourself lucky if you get “old”. (There are some really mean and unproductive comments on here? Like people are mocking her for ending a relationship in 2018??)

    • Bungler says:

      Sumire, that’s a ridiculous statement. But from your LOL I’m guessing you’re 12. I have a 12-year-old. I get it.

    • Dee says:

      Well…she is almost 50 so I’m not sure what else you would expect it to look like.

    • Jaded says:

      Oh please…old hands are experienced hands. They’ve held babies and built fences and cooked a million good meals and put band aids on boo-boos. They’ve dug gardens and painted walls, they’ve comforted feverish foreheads and held on dearly to their loved ones hands. I’m not ashamed of having old looking hands, they’ve done a sh*tload of hard work in my 65 year-old life and I’m proud of them. Just like I’m proud of my grey hairs. You’ll be there one day and I hope you learn to appreciate your hands.

      • tracking says:

        Well to be fair, Aniston’s has done none of these things, Jaded. Sorry, I couldn’t resist. Mine have though, and I appreciated this comment. Sumire, pathetic comment. You may be feeling yourself right now, but age will hit you faster than you can ever imagine.

      • AMA1977 says:

        Awww. this made me get a little misty. Mine are only 41 but they look older because I had to wash them a million times a day for work for many years, in addition to all of the wonderful things you attribute to them above. The skin on my face is still pretty smooth (thank you, alpha-hydroxys and sunscreen!) but my hands are a mess. I will remember to be thankful for all they’ve done instead of wishing they were less lived in. :)

  6. Louise177 says:

    Why is this even a story? I haven’t heard of a married woman being forced to return an engagement ring. Broken engagements yes but not after marriage. It’s weird this is news considering this never came up with all of the other breakups.

  7. Becks says:

    I kind of love the pics from Santa Fe. Her hair is messy! its not always shiny and glossy and perfect! she has a hair clip on her purse! Jennifer Aniston – she’s just like me!!! (I have major hair envy when it comes to most Hollywood stars lol.)

  8. damejudi says:

    How about she returns the ring, and he promises never to wear the jorts ever again?

  9. Cee says:

    I would sell it, especially if I never liked the ring. Donate the money, buy yourself a ring you actually like, etc.

  10. Hannah says:

    Am I the only one who thinks this was all just PR – the marriage, the rock? Was’t he totally broke and barely making any movies when they met…quartz was probably within his budget.. I dunno…

  11. CommentingBunny says:

    Plugs are soooo edgy and New York

  12. Elena says:

    is it really 10 carats? DM reports it is worth 500k, but wouldn’t 10 carats cost more than that?

    • PunkyMomma says:

      It depends on the clarity of the stone. This stone is of very poor clarity — and color as well. At $500,000, I found it overpriced.

  13. sunnydeereynolds says:

    Of course she got to keep it, she bought it herself! Haha.

  14. Luca76 says:

    We all know she paid for that rock of course she gets to keep it.

  15. PunkyMomma says:

    I’ve always side-eyed that ring for several reasons.

    Having had some experience in this industry, I can tell you most custom jewelers would have set a stone of that size in a far more substantial setting, or at the very least, balanced the setting so that the weight of the stone did not cause the ring to slide around the finger. There are methods to counterweight a large stone to keep it properly positioned on the finger.

    Then again, he probably went to Jared.

    • sparrow2 says:

      I have always suspected it was an heirloom.

    • whatWHAT? says:

      sparrow2, it does look like one, and that would go along with Theroux’s penchant for thrifting and dumpster diving.

      to add, re: PunkyMomma’s comment about the setting…my grandfather got my grandmother a beautiful peridot ring (her birthstone) back in the 40s and the stone is almost as big as Aniston’s ring’s stone, and the setting is a very delicate silver, also similar to Aniston’s setting.

      perhaps back in the day, that kind of delicate setting was the usual for cocktail rings?…and maybe it IS an heirloom?…

      but lol at “he went to Jared”…

      PS – that ring is now in my possession, and I am always hesitant to wear it as I worry that it’ll catch on something and the setting will break, or I’ll bang it on something and the stone will chip…rings that large are very impractical, and only good for wearing for short periods where you won’t be using your hands very much.

      • sparrow2 says:

        @what WHAT?

        Yes!! I am in possession of my Grandmother’s engagement ring. A very large ruby in a very delicate setting. I would be willing to bet that this is indeed, an heirloom.

      • Felicia says:

        Re: your Peridot ring… have the prongs checked and serviced if need be. Your grandmother probably wore that ring more than you do and managed not to break or chip it. But it’s also very much a cocktail ring / evening stone because they look better in artificial light than they do in daylight. If the setting has more than 4 prongs, it’s not going to fall out if one of them fails. Pull it out and wear it when you have occasions to do so, these things don’t get more brittle with age! :)

      • tracking says:

        Yes, I was curious and looked up vintage rose cut diamonds. Peter Lang has some large ones that look quite similar. And are surprisingly affordable by celebrity standards. This makes a lot of sense.

      • Felicia says:

        @Tracking: they are likely pretty much priced at the “recut to a round brilliant” value. And because this cut is flat on the back, you’d likely lose somewhere around 75 or 80% of the weight in that case.

      • whatWHAT? says:

        sparrow2, I’ll bet that ring is gorgeous.

        Felicia, thanks for the tip. I think the prongs are ok…and I’d actually bet that my GM didn’t wear it THAT much…she was a cooker and a gardener and really a very active person with her hands…I don’t recall seeing her wear it much, except for very special occasions. which is when I wear it, too. usually just to family functions where people who know her can appreciate it. I think my hesitation comes from a woman I used to babysit for. her engagement ring was a HUGE emerald-cut emerald (notoriously “soft” gems) that stuck out from the setting and she was always worried about whacking it on something and having it split/crack.

        PS – the other reason I don’t wear it much is that it only fits on my left-hand ring finger…THAT finger. as I’ve been with the bf for a LONG time, and the peridot is very light green and almost looks like a diamond from a distance, I’d be afraid I’d have to deal with “OMG YOU GUYS ARE FINALLY GETTING MARRIED” over and over. lol

  16. SJhere says:

    I have now reached my maximum saturation level on this story of JA divorce.
    I do like the purse on #1 photo. I’d take the ring if she doesn’t want it anymore. :)
    Btw, she needs a new hairdo. Or a more Carmel color.
    That’s all I’ve got.

    • Dee says:

      The purse is Chloe :) Zara had a great dupe last year.

      • Felicia says:

        Wasn’t that the “Jennifer” bag from Tom Ford? Maybe I’m thinking of a different one…

      • windyriver says:

        Yes, Tom Ford. Fell in love with it some years back when I saw a picture of her with it – summer in NYC in the grey dress – so remember it well. Lots of other photos of her with it so I guess the style’s a favorite.

  17. Frosty says:

    I still don’t think it’s a diamond! I can totally see her being all “quartz conducts the love vibes through the ether” when she chose it.

  18. lucy2 says:

    I’ve never cared for that ring, too big and an odd stone.
    He gave it to her, they got married, it’s hers. I’m pretty sure the rule is you give it back if the engagement is broken, unless it was gifted for Christmas or a birthday or something. Unless you simply want to give it back, which if I were her, I’d probably do. And if he declined, I’d sell it and donate the money.

    • Felicia says:

      I would buy myself a trapiche emerald slice, have it cut to the same outline and have the diamond mounted on it as a doublet.

      Or a flat ruby slice, have it engraved with something that means something to me and do the same. The diamond would act like a magnifying glass :)

      • sparrow2 says:

        What a great idea!! You clearly know your stuff.

      • Felicia says:

        :) It’s a passion and a profession in my case. And I have a great love for the weird and the wonderful, which is usually far more interesting than what people get fed as “what they should have”.

  19. No jeweler would set 8 cts in a cheap setting like that..its quartz.

    • Felicia says:

      Surface luster is clearly adamantine. As much as some of you hope he gave her quartz, it’s a diamond from that alone.

  20. LittlefishMom says:

    Hock it, get that twenty bucks!!

  21. Jan says:

    All I can say, is I always thought that stone was cr*p. If it’s a diamond is a poor quality one.

  22. Kristen from MA says:

    I think the reason that the stone isn’t sparkly is because it’s rose-cut. People are really into rose-cuts lately, but stones cut that way just don’t refract light the way a brilliant cut does.

    • Felicia says:

      Rose cuts don’t sparkle. They are basically a cabochon with the top bit faceted rather than domed. For any gemstone to sparkle, imagine a skylight where the light enters (the crown) with mirrors positioned underneath at the correct angles so that the light entering the skylight bounces from mirror to mirror and then gets directed back out of the skylight to your eyes. A Rose cut is like a skylight with no mirrors behind it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        iirc the royal Dutch Diamond Bandeau tiara is made of (giant) rose cuts. It may be because they are foil-backed, but it always looks plenty sparkly to me. More so with night lighting rather than daytime.

        If you haven’t visited her site, The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor’s fun take on the diamond bandeau is worth a read. Never know what you might need on a desert island.

      • Felicia says:

        A quick read on that says they are often mistakenly identified as rose cut, but actually aren’t. But holy cow, that’s some collection of huge rocks!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, the Dutch have a huge collection of huge rocks. The Dutch Sapphire, Aquamarine, Antique Pearl Tiara to name a few.

        The Swedish and Luxembourg royal families also have significant tiara collections.

  23. minx says:

    Ugly, gaudy stone. Cheap looking setting. Just embarrassingly bad.

  24. ike says:

    I remember Jen saying she was engaged, then deliberately driving the paps nuts because she put her hand in her pocket for a few months. Then we saw the ring. I guess she really didn’t like it , saying it wasn’t her style, and getting her friend Jennifer M to design her wedding rings. She hasn’t worn that big ring in years. If I were Justin, my feelings would have been hurt. One of the gossip magazines she claimed that Justin reminded her of one of her gay friends vibe when they first met. (Don’t know if that’s true or not). The way she cares about the press and her little barbs towards Justin emasculated him IMO.

    • notasugarhere says:

      She said this to People at the time.

      ‘Justin Theroux proposed to his now-fiancee Jennifer Aniston with a striking 8-carat diamond ring, and the actress says she’s thrilled with her beau’s design.

      “I was impressed,” Jennifer told People of her blinding bauble. “I had no idea what I wanted. He just knows what I like.”

      To get a feel for the actress’ jewelry taste, Justin enlisted the help of Jennifer’s trusted stylists for guidance.

      “[He] worked with the girls that I have worked with for years and years and years, so he kind of was picking the specialists’ brains,” she told the mag. “He kept it within a very small circle of people. It was one of the sneakiest jobs I’ve ever seen, actually.”’

      • ike says:

        Thanks for sharing notasaugarhere. She can’t keep up with her lies. lol

      • Jussie says:

        Did you actually expect her to say, on the record with People, that she disliked it?

      • notasugarhere says:

        I would expect her to pick a set of lies and stick with them. Not to extol the virtues of his taste on record, then go on record later (before the split) about not liking it.