PRECIOUS STONES
CONSIDERED IN THEIR SCIENTIFIC AND ARTISTIC RELATIONS.
CHAPTER I.
definition of precious stones.
Beauty, durability, and rarity—such are the qualities characterising the minerals to which we apply the adjective "precious." But the term "mineral," though including all true precious stones, does not exclude some natural products of the earth (such as gold and platinum) which, though precious, are not stones in the ordinary acceptation of that word. Native metals, then, are outside the category of precious stones. On the other hand, at least one animal product, the pearl, is commonly ranked with such minerals as the diamond and the sapphire, associated as it is with these stones in jewellery, and partaking as it does of the characters of beauty and rarity, with a good share of durability.
After all, it is no easy matter to define a precious stone. Where can the line be drawn between stones that are precious and stones that do not merit that appellation? Is not the preciousness of one sort of stone or of another dependent in part upon caprice, upon time and place? If the fashion follow some new direction, then gem-stones now reckoned of small value might in some measure displace the diamond and the ruby; for, compared with these gems, there are doubtless several hard and beautiful stones which are found in less abundance, but which remain less costly because in less demand. Yet there is something to be said in favour of the high position commonly given to the diamond, the ruby, the emerald, the sapphire, and we may add the pearl and the opal: they all possess a very conspicuous and obvious beauty. By brilliancy and colour they force themselves upon our attention, while the spinel, the jargoon, and the tourmaline generally need to be studied, to be looked into, that their merits may be discovered. But the argument that beautiful stones ought not to be employed in the higher kinds of bijouterie unless they are costly is an unworthy one. It will not bear criticism. Why should not moonstones, even if they can be bought for a shilling apiece, be introduced into goldsmiths' work of the most artistic sort? Surely they may rank at least with coloured enamels, which are of extremely small money value, but which are prized highly when employed with skill in well-designed jewels.
It has been before stated that the caprice of fashion influences and alters the market value of precious stones from time to time. The peridot, the amethyst, the cat's-eye, and the aquamarine have each had their day, and then been abandoned for new favourites. Even the emerald has suffered vicissitudes, and so has the opal. The causes of such changes in the popular esteem in which particular species of gems are held cannot often be traced. A new fashion is set or an old one restored, and once set is blindly followed. The introduction of a little-known gem, however beautiful it may be, is generally a most difficult matter. A jeweller who was in the first rank of artistic workers was showing a customer a bracelet beautifully set with the rich green garnets of Bobrovka. This lady admired the stones and the workmanship immensely, but spoke of the former as emeralds. The jeweller honestly said: "They are not emeralds, but a rare sort of garnet from the Ural Mountains." Forthwith the lady rejoined: "Well, after all, I do not think I care so very, very much for this bracelet; please show me something else." Not that she knew that there did exist a real objection to these green garnets—they are not quite hard enough to stand much wear. For the ignorance that prevails about precious stones, not only among the wearers and owners of them, but also among jewellers themselves, is indeed dense. A London goldsmith had six stones to mount as rings; in returning them finished, the invoice gave to the specimens five wrong designations! A few years ago how very few jewellers understood what was wanted when a tourmaline or a jargoon was asked for! and yet the tourmaline and the jargoon have been long known. Diamond, ruby, emerald, sapphire, pearl, opal, turquoise; turquoise, opal, pearl, sapphire, emerald, ruby, diamond—such is the range and variety of acknowledged gems. If a novelty has to be introduced it must be called by some modification of these well-known names, and must become a "Cape ruby" or an "Uralian emerald." In speaking further on, in reference to the artistic use of precious stones, something more will be said upon this point of the neglect of certain kinds of extremely beautiful stones.
From the statements just made it will be gathered that although a stone to be precious must have, in very good measure, the qualities of beauty, durability, and rarity, yet we cannot arrange precious stones in any fixed and definite order, by assigning them places in our list in accordance with the degrees in which they possess these three qualities. Even if all stones going under the same name were equally fine this would be impossible; much more is this the case when we learn that two specimens—say of ruby—each weighing the same, might be worth five pounds and fifty pounds respectively. In placing these three necessary qualities of beauty, durability, and rarity in this sequence, the intention has been to express the preeminent necessity for beauty in stones deserving the name of precious; the importance of durability, which must claim the second place; and the desirability of a certain degree of rarity, especially where the quality of durability may not exist in the highest degree. How far a very beautiful and hard mineral would maintain its position as a precious stone in the event of its becoming exceedingly abundant, one cannot venture to judge; but as we have to deal with existing facts only, the problem is one which practically has not yet been presented for solution.
As precious stones have just to be looked at and worn, or used in decorative work, it will be readily understood why no occult property is of much moment in determining their value. Individual and learned amateurs may indeed value a stone according to what they know of its history, its romance, its memories, or the curiousness of its components; but in ninety-nine cases in a hundred any enhancement of value through such causes is out of the question. Still, from the mineralogical and chemical points of view, it is perhaps legitimate to import some elements of interest when appraising the right of a stone to be called precious, or its place in the list of gems. One need not follow those writers who speak of precious, semi-precious, and common stones; but one may reasonably arrange the different kinds in a few groups or classes, according to what we may call the average sum of their merits. To assign a precise place to each species is not possible. Hence the futility of such a classification as that published in 1860 by K. E. Kluge wherein emerald takes lower rank than zircon, and precious opal comes after garnet, while to turquoise is assigned a place beneath nine other stones only one of which (peridot) is even known to dealers in precious stones, and to the purchasers of jewels.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse