Talk:Gemstones: Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| 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) |
|||
Yes please. It's just the start of a list. It would be great to see more stuff on the list, and if you know it was only known in specific times and places, that could be notated next to it. |
|||
[[User:Tiff|Tiff]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 15:53, 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)
Yes please. It's just the start of a list. It would be great to see more stuff on the list, and if you know it was only known in specific times and places, that could be notated next to it.
Tiff
