Nautilus pearl

[DrTKStern]

The Unknown

The Unknown

While I was away, you went full tilt on nautilus pearls. I saw one of Jeremy Norris's tridacna squamosa pearls in person on Saturday and it had the flame "ring of fire". I have to admit that they do look very similar to the nautilus pearls.

I'm sure that Ken will have the definitive answer and we can all ponder and debate to our heart's content when the monograph is released. I know some of you are frustrated, but I think we are lucky to see one of nature's last mysteries unfold in our time. This is fun!

Cheers,
Blaire

Hi, All,

I have both kinds...i.e. Nautilus and Tridacna of all varieties, plus multiple examples of various certified marine gastropods... and side-by-side, they do not look the same as Nautilus. Beyond my certified Nautilus pompilius pearl, you are going to see something that is the first and only one of its kind known.

What is the greatest feeling? To be sailing the Celebes Sea in a tiny craft at night, wife beside you, with phosporescent wake, balmy air, drums pounding out warnings on nearby atolls, armed to the teeth among trusted men, hoping for pearls to be found at sunrise, spotting our men who have been diving at night, and having them extend a hand full of treasure, toothless smiles hungry for rewards. Ah! That is living! A man can only die once.

Datu Tom

 

[SteveM]

I saw one of Jeremy Norris's tridacna squamosa pearls in person on Saturday and it had the flame "ring of fire". I have to admit that they do look very similar to the nautilus pearls.

Since we don't yet know what Nautilus Pearls are supposed to look like, this is a difficult statement to make.

I do think it is important to point out that the 'ring of fire' phenomenon (did Valeria101 invent this?) is not the same as 'flame.' In Hubert Bari's The Pink Pearl there are pages and pages of close ups of flames that mesmerize upon viewing over a short period.

Here is an extract of flames taken directly from Pearlshooter's image of Dr. Tom's certified Nautilus. There is no confusing this phenomenon.

 

[GemGeek]

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Flames create the "ring of fire" effect. There was a flame pattern all over the pearl. Of course I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the two side by side. I'm sure Tom can see a subtle difference.

 

[Valeria101]

I do think it is important to point out that the 'ring of fire' phenomenon (did Valeria101 invent this?) is not the same as 'flame.'

Yes. Just needed a name for the respective optical effect...

And I do believe there is a connection of some sort - nothing poetic, having to do with the material and how reflected light is 'read' by a viewer. I do not claim the relation is exclusive or that it goes both ways (perhaps not the case that 'flame' => 'ring reflection under expected lighting conditions'; possibly the reverse...)

I have to admit right here that this 'connection' is also mine alone. AND only intuitive at this point. It is based on reading diligently through a model built a while back to represent.... observed refraction and reflection in common faceting patterns for colored stones (there is various software that does this). Clearly, that model was dealing with a more 'discrete' structure; nacre structure allows an elegant generalization... [my way of appreciating beautiful things - perhaps a bit unusual, 'reckon that]

 

[Valeria101]

Incidence of occurrence. Attested to be found only once in multiple decades throughout the Sulu Sea region, why would the only such known and certified example be round and perfectly marked? May we please see an imperfect specimen?

Eh.... 'just glad to be getting the news of such process of discovery.
Ready to bet that GIA's newly acquired capability for species ID should produce some more public news of such things. At least, I hope they will pursue the institution's past practice in this respect. Surely, exotic pearls have only started to make news. I already relish the thought that unlike many curious gem varieties that simply blip on the radar, exotic natural pearls - rare as they might be - come from a less spurious supply (the small, sometimes singular gem 'pockets' and 'finds' and 'strikes') and we'll keep hearing about them. It would be sad if these turned out to be 'to rare for their own good' (i.e. too rare to stay in the public eye and buyers' wants)... Oh well...

I am not ready to take photos for 'proof' over an impending report from a respected laboratory. The hint is nice, but it is plainly clear that nacre structure is indeed a matter on the same scale as histology - and not because of Dr. Stern's analogy, but because a couple of decades worth of research on nacre deposition in materials science has evolved that way [incidentally, nautilus nacre is a prominent topic!... but not all gastropods are covered in comparable depth]...

All in all, I would not expect to recognize types of pearls by 'flame' patterns in a reasonable blind test (say, partial images of pearls under dark-field, no color, etc.). Chances are you will do better at it. I imagine quite a few have more experience, and therefore better chances for pattern recognition, then I do.

Still.... the task of a laboratory, as GIA's, is harder and the expected capability of consistent positive identification, more precise. Gonna wait for their take on the basics.



PS: 'calcareous pearls' sound as poetic as gall stones... Poetry aside, doesn't it fit all pearls? I mean, when it comes down t it, most re basically calcium carbonate and some goo or another. [can't believe I just wrote this!]

 

[Valeria101]

... Beyond my certified Nautilus pompilius pearl, you are going to see something that is the first and only one of its kind known.

What is the greatest feeling? To be sailing the Celebes Sea in a tiny craft at night...

Doesn't take all that to get my envy! You are talking of discovery! - freaking' great feeling and hard to share - even if the results and the background generally can...

 

[Slraep]

I see what Effisk is saying about the supposed "specimens of old" being yellowish in colour.

Interesting how they were thrown away because of being considered unlucky! Steve, you don't think the "Nautilus Mite/Pearl of Allah" road show might generate a little too much bad mojo?

Also I think if/when the nautilus pearl checks out, and if it gets sold as such, the new owner should remember to remove it from his person before engaging in any bar fights or duels. I wonder if the radius of its bad mojo can be measured somehow at the GIA? A lead box should be used for safe keeping perhaps? I dunno...

Excerpt from a text on the Farlang website.

http://www.farlang.com/gemstones/streeter_pearls_and_pearling/page_081

"Archipelago assert that Pearls of a yellowish colour have been taken from the Pearly Nautilus {Nautilus potnpilius), one of the group of cephalopodous molluscs ; but that they throw them away as they are considered unlucky, adding that if a man fought with a ring on, bearing such a Pearl, he would surely be killed. Taking into consideration however the habits and organization of this wonderful animal, and re*membering the beautiful nacreous lining of its shell, it may possibly be accepted as a true statement. Indeed, Mr. Haynes, has a specimen in his possession which he considers an undoubted " Nautilus Pearl."

 

[SteveM]

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Flames create the "ring of fire" effect. There was a flame pattern all over the pearl. Of course I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the two side by side. I'm sure Tom can see a subtle difference.

You were clear. My assertion, never more applicable than in this case, is that chatoyance ('ring of fire') and flame are associated primarily by their commonality in pearls (calcareous non-nacreous), and may even coincide for maximum effect, but are not one and the same. The flame structure in Dr. Tom's pearl, and on the dozens of pages in The Pink Pearl does not appear to be chatoyant, while the chatoyance of the JNorris's clam pearl, and the pearls published at Pearl-Professor, does not show flame (literally the shapes of flames, as though looking into a fireplace, i.e. my close-up above).

But I'm not trained by GIA. I am however aware of official literature equating chatoyance and flame.

 

[GemGeek]

I remain open to all possibilities and I hope to have a chance to see them side by side. I think it would be very fun to see them with you, Steve, so we can satsify our curiosity together. (And share a celebratory bottle of wine?) Always questing for the next frontier in pearldom!

 

[SteveM]

I think it would be very fun to see them with you, Steve, so we can satsify our curiosity together. (And share a celebratory bottle of wine?) Always questing for the next frontier in pearldom!

That would be great, and the wine would be the absolute best (right at the moment in the high mountains of Arag?n, Spain and would recommend the local producer's Garnacha from 100-year-old vines). Everyone's invited!

 

[Valeria101]

I am however aware of official literature equating chatoyance and flame.

Ah!... Can you point to the title?

 

[SteveM]

Can you point to the title?

Quite pressed for time at the moment arriving very late to the hotel each night while leading a group tour across Spain. Rapid web sourcing (Wikipedia, under Pearls) together with GemGeek's statement resulted in a supposition ('never assume' a most worthy axiom). I would be pleased to discover that CIBJO, GIA or some other recognized authority actually does distinguish chatoyance vs. flame as intuited from personal observation per my earlier post. Perhaps someone can help dig this up in the interim (and start a new thread!)?

 

[GemGeek]

I had seen a lot of non-nacreous pearls, but I had never got to handle them under a bright light. When I held the Melo pearl in the sunshine, with movement I could see chatoyancy inside the flame channels. I was startled. It tweaked my whole perception of non-nacreaous pearls. Suddenly they were very lively, where they had seemed flat before.

https://www.pearl-guide.com/forum/n...-melo-melo-pearl-pearl-ate-new-york-city.html

 

[SteveM]

I had seen a lot of non-nacreous pearls, but I had never got to handle them under a bright light. When I held the Melo pearl in the sunshine, with movement I could see chatoyancy inside the flame channels.

In this post with the photo below a superb conch pearl ring I saw in Nassau and a pearl that remains a mystery from Dr. Tom are shown to the effect that chatoyance and flames can indeed coexist (all those diamonds certainly assist the chatoyance in the conch). It is the clam pearls and Valeria101's 'Ring of Fire' that display chatoyance without any outward appearance of flame structure.

 

[Valeria101]

Got it.

I don't think any gemollogical journal got further into these pearl properties then using the term 'flame' for an easily visible pattern. Hope one will.

 

[Valeria101]

Up with the thread!

A presentation of Nautilus pearls written by Dr. Stern appeared recently in the The New Jeweller Magazine, a publication of the Indian jewelry industry.

Click here to download the text as a Pdf file

PS. the story also relates to the 'Tom Stern's natural pearls' thread.

 

[SteveM]

A presentation of Nautilus pearls written by Dr. Stern?

Thanks. The pearl as captured by Tim Robinson/Pearlshooter (post 35, its permalink is somehow missing) for the Dubai auction catalogue is by far more unique, beautiful and intriguing than the same pearl in Dr. Stern's wife's image used in the article. Are they truly the same pearl? What tricks lighting can play.

Most impressive: That fossilized Nautilus shell. Incredible!

===

P.S. Comparative images for ease of use. Pearlshooter on left.

 

[Valeria101]

What tricks lighting can play.

Same thought here - those pictures belong together.

The article reminded me of some early artistic incarnations of Nautius shells in fantastic cabinet iteams cca.16th century Europe.

Strange that from all things that could have been and were brought from the same exotic locations as the nautilus shells this species got so particularly lucky. And that the attention has lasted ever since, including in the original rarefied vein and ever broader...

Too obscure to matter for the nautilus pearls fate today, you think?

----

By Google, the early nautilus cups and Dutch still ifes are mandatory for every large museum on the Planet!: Ontario Art Museum, Royal Colection (UK), Rijksmuseum, V&A, The Walters, Dresden's Green Vault... And from the looks of it, those fellows were newcomers in the nautilus collecting habit.

 

[SteveM]

Most impressive: That fossilized Nautilus shell. Incredible!

Hello, Ammolite (could this be the beginning of a new relationship?)! And it's a biogenic gemstone (like pearls)?

The many and varied chambers of the Nautilus!

 

[SteveM]

Ammolite Ammonite (a spectacular, intact 13" specimen).

Further thought: Ammolite being the result of compression and mineralization of nacre, we are faced once again with the apparent contradiction of Ammonite/Nautilus nacreous nature vs. the non-nacreous certified examples of Nautilus Pearls.

Mr. Scarratt's monograph becomes ever more anticipated!