Natural or Artificial?

The Deutsche Goldschmiede Zeitung, a German jewelry trade journal, has supplemented an article, from which we quote, published upon the points of difference between reconstructed and genuine rubies, by presenting some additional facts, and especially by reproducing two illustrations made from enlarged photographs of reconstructed and genuine rubies supplied by A. F. Kotler, of St. Petersburg:

On careful examination, in the case of the artificial ruby, we notice at once the typical concentric lines as well as the little bubbles occurring in large numbers, which are always spherical, having, in other words, the character of an air bubble in a melted mass. The concentric fine lines, showing variations in the colour, were compared at the time with the circular or spiral lines that result from the string of a paste-like mass, leaving nothing to be desired as far as plainness is concerned. A naturally formed genuine ruby also shows spaces or enclosures, but these are more or less angular, being bounded by crystalline surfaces, The angularity of these voids is, moreover, determined by the entire crystalline structure of the natural stone.

If, therefore, in the genuine ruby, the colour is unequally distributed, the colour stripes invariably assume a vertical direction, are never concentric as in the artificial stone. We may also frequently note that the colour does not run in one direction, but that colour stripes, often of varying intensity, cross one another at obtuse angles; in other words, correspond strictly with the crystalline structure of the grown stone. We may reiterate the assertion that in a genuine natural ruby concentric lines are never noted. This most important, and at the same time certain and simplest, distinguishing characteristic, is the more to be regarded, inasmuch as the specific gravity, the colour, the hardness, and the dichroism—in other words, all the optical and chemical properties—of the artificial ruby correspond, more or less, with those of the genuine stone and consequently the scientific assistance, in this case, fails us entirely. An experienced gem expert will, moreover, recognise the genuine ruby by its peculiar, characteristic, soft, silky brilliance, which is lacking in all artificial rubies.

At the recent convention of German jewellers in Heidelberg, where the question as to the nature of the so-called artificial or "scientific" precious stones was exhaustively discussed and a resolution expressing an attitude of opposition towards excessive advertisement of these productions was adopted, Court Jeweller Th. Heiden, in the name of the "Association of Jewellers, Gold and Silversmiths of Bavaria," spoke in favour of hearing an opinion of a prominent authority in regard to the entire subject. According to the Journal der Goldschmiedekunst, this has now been rendered, the well-known mineralogist Prof. Dr. Conrad Oebbeke, of the technical high school in Munich, having expressed himself as follows, concerning artificial precious stones:

Between the natural and the artificial precious stones, the material difference will always exist, that one is a natural, the other an artificial product. Up to the present time, I have not seen a single artificial precious stone that could not be recognised as such. The claim that the artificial stones are not to be distinguished from the natural gems, that they are absolutely free from defects, etc., according to my experience, is not justifiable. Even if it is possible to produce precious stones having the same crystallographic, physical, and chemical properties as the natural gems, they are nevertheless not equal in value to the natural product. No more so than an ever so carefully executed and deceptively similar copy of a work of art, a painting, a piece of sculpture, etc., can be called the original. The artificial products, made in the laboratory, are not formed under the same conditions as the natural article, and for this reason we may rest assured that, even should the present scientific methods of distinguishing the genuine from the artificial precious stones fail, further scientific investigation will reveal a method that will make the distinction possible. Interesting as may be the success thus far attained in the production of artificial precious stones, and while we may congratulate ourselves on the progress made in chemical technics in this direction, to the connoisscur, these articles will always be artificial products that can never deprive the natural stones of their value. On the contrary really beautiful natural precious stones will only be the gainer. The claim that synthetic stones will ever break the market for real precious stones, is, in my opinion, utterly unfounded.