No. That's not Faustina Minor, and why would it be an image of any empress, anyway?

Roman Collector · September 21

For reasons that baffle even myself, I have been fascinated by ancient Roman hairstyles, particularly as reflected in the coinage of the Roman imperial period. Hairstyles, of course, reflect the times during which they were popular. Art historians use them to date objects that are otherwise divorced from archaeological context or unclear. I can date this ring, for example, to Julio-Claudian times because it depicts a Roman matron wearing a pre-Flavian coiffure. The dealer, clearly unfamiliar with the 10 hairstyles of Faustina the Younger, erroneously attributes the image as "possibly depicting Faustina Minor facing left."

Compare this to the coinage of Antonia, Agrippina I, or Agrippina II (BMC specimen).

Why wouldn't a dealer in antiquities take the time to research such a thing if unsure? But the bigger question is why would a Roman citizen have a ring engraved with Agrippina the Elder's image? It's folly to identify an image without an inscription. This intaglio ring almost certainly depicts an unknown Roman matron wearing a hairstyle that was popular at the time. While many women c. 2000 CE wore the "Jennifer Aniston" hairstyle, not every photo of a woman wearing such a style is Jennifer Aniston herself, right?!