Talk:Gemstones: Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
mNo edit summary |
m (Agree with simon) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Also, though not technically a gem, '''amber''' ? |
Also, though not technically a gem, '''amber''' ? |
||
:I'd say yes to both. Although amber is of vegetable origin I don't see why it shouldn't be classed as a mineral. [[User:Conrad Leviston|Conrad Leviston]] 09:46, 9 Oct 2004 (EST) |
|||
Revision as of 10:46, 9 October 2004
Brief query -- ought some reference be made to lapis, which was known from Ancient Egypt onward ?
Also, though not technically a gem, amber ?
- I'd say yes to both. Although amber is of vegetable origin I don't see why it shouldn't be classed as a mineral. Conrad Leviston 09:46, 9 Oct 2004 (EST)
