Good afternoon IGS family I had to share the most amazing news that me and my wife just adopted the newest three members to the family as of right now they are not for sale someday soon they will be but I don’t even have enough information to think about giving anyone any sort of price so please don’t ask if you’re interested then there’s no problem with you making an offer when so when they do come up for sale if you’re the highest offer back again in touch with you then but with something like this I have to know everything before I even think about letting it go so it could be a while but they’re just so beautiful I had to share with you guys if anyone knows the locality of any of these or any information that I can use when researching for the Providence there was no paper work with them I just happen to see you then in a correction and one thing led to another I’ve never seen anything like the larger one in person or on the Internet but I know someone’s probably seen it or similar ones that probably can have the same pocket and if you’re that someone please I could really use your knowledge and if not that’s okay too I’ve been researching them just haven’t came across yet anyways that’s enough waiting here’s some pics
Those are awesome specimens! I believe they are quartz. Amethyst and smoky. There is some really good definition on the hexagonal crystals. That was my first thought. Although the reddish coloration is a bit puzzling, but I believe there has been some cinnabar found among quartz. So do be careful of handling that last specimen, just in case!
Really unique pieces! What a find! 
This does not look like Quartz to me. The crystal structure is cubic. More likely it’s Fluorite.
Cannot discount Fluorite, agreed!
If under UV light, it fluoresces, this could provide an indicator towards fluorite. This would not prove it 100%, since some fluorite does not fluoresce, but quartz is typically non-reactive to UV. Unfortunately, quartz has been known to grow on top of fluorite and visa versa. If these are coexisting structures… we’ll be hard pressed to separate them.
One test that could help is identifying pleochroic / birefringence. Using a dichroscope, quartz may show some weak dichroic behavior. Fluorite will not have any. But again… this is not definitive.
Without doing a potentially destructive test, like the hardness/scratch test or hot hydrochloric acid test, it will be difficult to prove with basic gemology tests.
An RI test would separate the two from each other, but not be easy without damaging one of the crystal spires.
Specific Gravity would separate the two as well, but, if they are coexisting with each other, or if there are significant voids within the specimens, or a significant amount of matrix material is still present, the test results might be inaccurate. (Still leaning towards this being a possible test, though)
A spectroscopic measurement may provide the answer, but some of the more advanced tests are “destructive”. Would be the most definitive test to do.
It is however, difficult to find a isometric (cubic) crystal, that naturally forms hexagonally with elongation in the c-axis. Both specimens have hexagonal prism shapes, which tends to indicate they could be from the trigonal system.
There are some good 3-D models that display the six crystalline structures Fluorite commonly develops.
A similar article for quartz is in my original response which shows the 32 possible complex crystalline lattice shapes, quartz can develop.
So I’m pretty sure it’s not quartz I agree I believe it’s most likely a florappetite I did fluorescence testing it emits a small amount mostly pinkish fluorescence no obvious phosphorescence originally I was considering possible aragonite because of crossing characteristics but recognize that I have observed tends to lack the nice crisp edges and corners because of a little hardness that the specimens have although florappetite. Is normally not as distinct as in this either these crystals seem to have a very centered growth it seems to start from the center going outward like a spray they seem to be in a 120° in correlation to the first growth to the second and then second to third and so on the structure like it starts similar interference to a barrel Crystal but growing from the center out termination on each side and then it starts another generation from the center out pushing the determinations from the inside out and groaning Booth as well as length so being double-sided you could also measure a 60° correlation on the other side I’ve seen this in crysaberyl but not florappetite so I am still researching be specimens for other possibilities I may have to just have small pieces tested to be absolutely sure that’s why so far I just called them beautiful and I’ve been watching for feedback for leads I love learning there’s always something to learn and gemology thank you for your feedback if I do have any absolute results I will absolutely let you know until then if anyone has any Clues I will keep researching possibilities
Seems Quartz may have been kicked to the curb along with Fluorite. Fluorite has a blue - violet - green reaction to UV. Quartz is typically inert.
What type of UV light do you have? LW or SW or broad spectrum? That could be another data point.
Based on the pink fluorescence you observed, the following gems are now on the list:
-
Morganite
-
Kunzite
-
Calcite
There maybe a few others, still need to research more on UV fluorescence behaviors. If anyone finds more, please post them here.
Twinned crystals at 60 / 120 deg (Good Observation) is observed with three of the beryl family members.
We can probably discount Calcite, because of its crystalline shapes… (at this point I don’t want to discount anything…)
I’m not certain Kunzite can have same growth orientations like the beryl. Still looking into that and if someone has observed that behavior, would be good to know. Just as a precaution, certain Kunzite deposits can be sensitive to strong sunlight, specifically with UV. I would keep both covered out of direct sunlight, just in case.
Kunzite also displays a strong trichroism. You might be able to observe this using a pen-light shining through the three primary optical axis on one of the twinned crystals. One direction should be colorless, the other two, pink and violet.
Also, do you have a refractometer or a polariscope?
I vote for none of the above. ID’ing a mineral specimen by visual inspection even for experts can be quite difficult. If there is a university geology department in your city, take it there and see if anyone can ID it, or at leaset give you an opinion on what it is from inspecting it in person. The use of gemologic techniques such as refractometry doesn’t work well on rough specimens that are cloudy. One thing you can do is to identify the crystal class by using a goniometer/protractor to measure the crystal face angles to narrow down the possibities, but that also might not be possible from looking at the pcitures… they are an intergrowth of crystals without a free standing individual crystal. Getting an expert mineralologist to look at it is still the best bet.
there’s not enough information in a picture for an ID. RIght now most of what is being said is speculation. You can rule out quartz… the crystal habit is not quartz. The upright specimen looks hexagonal but without measurements on the small clear side crystal with a goniometer you can’t know what the angles on the faces really are. A hexagonal habit is leading towards the suggestions of morganite, kunzite, and tourmaline and apatite…
The large crystal group looks in part hexagonal but again looks are deceiving.
more info on hardness might help if you can scratch it on the underside or a place that won’t be seen when displayed. It does look like a soft mineral. Flourite is a good guess but flourite is isometric. The large crystal group does not look isometric. Calcite is trigonal and take many different habits. It’s one possibility. again a destructive method on the underside with a very small drop of hydrochloric acid could confirm carbonate by effervesence… Apatite is hexagonal but won’t effervesce.
I still think your best bet is to have it look at by a professional geologist or mineralogist. without testing even they would not be able to definitely confirm what it is, or they might be able to do it just by visual inspection and heft/feel…
Mineral specimens should come with paperwork describing what it is and provenance… a specific locality or mine would be best for provenance. Since you don’t have it, identification is as far as you will be able to go without some very sophisticated testing that is cost prohibitive., eg. electron microprobe, laser ablation mass spect, x ray crystallography, most of these techniques are minimally destructive to destructive… the latter techniques can determine provenance if there’s a cross reference in the goeologic literature to major and trace element signatures and isotopic compositions.
Hi John, for the fun of it, I’d guess the first specimen as Fluorite and the second Dravite or Schorl. Can’t tell with the lighting
All good points. Concur that taking the specimens to a minerologist would be the best approach, but it would potentially levy some analysist fees as you mentioned. While I definitely resist suggesting destructive tests, a minerologist would ultimately need to perform at least two.
I considered Apatite due to the crystal taxonomy but due to its fluorescence behavior felt it was not a good candidate. I can see where Tourmaline could be added to the list.
Since both specimens are not completely opaque, using a refractometer, polariscope, dichroscope and/or a hand-held spectrometer could add useful data points.
I was hoping in the tradition and spirit of IGS’s founder’s methods, we could narrow down the possible species using good note taking and sleuthing the available literature, in the hopes of coming to a communal consensus.
Unlike images of cut gemstones, these two unique beauties provide the observer with some very tantalizing clues of the crystal structure and visible features. 
We could help John pare down the list of probable candidates and provide our members a chance to contribute and exercise basic research, which seems a good path for everyone to solve the mysteries afoot.
I just finished reading one of my cherished Agatha Christie novels, so I must apologize if my dialog seems smitten with a particular inspector’s caricature.
Depending on where you live, a geologist/mineralogist could ID it for free…community college professors generally are knowlegdable enough and shouldn’t charge a fee for just looking and examining it in person. If they can’t ID it definitively, they usually will give you tips on how to further proceed. The only problem that I have run across is access… sometimes you need to ask around and get an appointment to see someone…If they have been bombarded by laypersons asking for stone and mineral sample ID’s they could refuse… continuing on your quest to ID the minerals on your own can start with minerology 101 traditional methods… measuring crystal face angles to narrow down the crystal class, which will be very helpful in excluding a host of other possibilities. getting a refractive index on a clear small crystal protrusion also will help, being aware that in most crystals are not isometric and will have different refractive indices along different crystal axes… if you can measure just two axes, that will rule out more possibilities. The point about SpG is well taken as the samples could be polymineralic. However, the large crystal mass could give you a decent reading just because of it’s mass/size… doing a SpG test will be a challege for something that large. You would need a big and accurate balance that can handle a large specimen…spring scales aren’t accurate enough… most of the SpG set ups are for individual gemstones…however, roy john in a previous post was able to do SpG measurements using a fine plastic net bag to hold the samples and weigh them in air and water. So far as florescence is concerned, I don’t think that is too useful… many minerals show flourescence in different colors depending on the trace elements present…the absence of floresence doesn’t narrow down the category of mineral sufficiently.,Good luck on your endeavor… forget about provenance for the time being, until you can get it definitively identified. Provenance is an entirely different matter… it does require high tech analysis that is cost prohibitive… even if you get a trace element profile and isotope ratios, identifying provenance would not be possible unless there are cross references in the geologic literature. Searching the geologic literature is an awesome task.
One last word: if there are no academics or willing academics in your local area, consider taking the hand specimens to a GIA certified gemologist… they might be able to ID your crystal by visual inspection and handling it in person…gems are cut from crystals, so they should know rough…
better pictures and some close ups at different angles of individual crystals would help, if we are going in the direction of ID by picture.
Ok I im busted I have enough equipment to test them but I’ve been busy I’m in the middle of a lawsuit as well as I keep getting distracted by gems and minerals and not getting the law research completed. The fact that no one has seen these before and everyone seems interested I will post better pictures and what results some testing provided by the end of next weekend till then I will be watching for and other posts . I also admit I did just use a protractor quickly to reference the 60-120 degree crystal structure so thank you for your honest feedback I agree with you that it is not proper testing methods so I should have started it strictly as an observation leading to a personal opinion I believed
My educated guess is fluorite, calcium fluoride. A hardness test and refractive index measurement on a splinter from a cavity under the base should easily clinch it. If in doubt, a splinter cooked with sulfuric acid will give insoluble gypsum and hydrofluoric acid. If you do the test in a small glass test tube with very little strong sulfuric acid then the hydrofluoric acid generated will etch the glass. If you want to carry out this test please use eye protection and appropriate gloves etc.
Regarding provenance, big and beautiful samples of such fluorite currently come from China.
HF acid gas is highly toxic… do not want to generate it even if in small amounts… if enough to etch glass, it’s too much… free flourides ion cannot be neutralized with alkaline material…free Flouride ion, as with sodium flouride is extemely toxic…even if the acid is neutralized, free flouride ion can cause tissue destruction…if anyone attempts this, do it outdoors… neutralize it first with baking soda, then add calcium gluconate to reprecitiate insoluble calcium flouride… DO NOT breath in vapors… stand up wind…will cause lung damage that is irrreversible.
since your initial post of the pictures, have you had a definitive ID?.. think that everyone would be interested to know… please post if you have an ID… thanks.
A small mineral splinter in a test tube with acid solution will not create HF vapour unless it boils dry.
Chemical tests are a forgotten part of mineral identification. Provided people carry out tests on a very small scale with proper ventilation and also eye and skin protection there is low risk. I suggest interested persons visit libraries that have books such as Vogel on inorganic analysis and Feigl on spot tests. Not every problem needs microscopes or computerised equipment to solve it.
Skin, eye, respiratory protection are mandatory… mentioned it because some people will do it inside the house without ventilation nor protective equipment. I agree that the amount of HF will be small, but getting on the skin will still cause burns, even when neutralized. Most people don’t know that neutralizing HF acid still leaves toxic free flouride ion…The whole point is that people should take appropriate precautions…
So far as chemical tests are concerned, I absolutely agree that they can be done but also are destructive… I confirmed calcite in a bulk crystal cluster by using HCl… had tons of crystals I picked up myself so no loss in sacrificing a piece… it effervesced, confirming carbonate…even though the rhombohedral crystal habit was typical for calcite… just to make sure it wasn’t gypsum, I let it dissolve completely…H2S04 won’t attack gypsum as vigourously, nor exolve C02. It will tranform it into anhydrite as a residue if left to slowly dissolve… acid testing does not need to be that destructive, a small drop will confirm carbonate… can be neutralized immediately with baking soda. Distilled white vinegar is a safer substitute…reaction will be slower…Acid testing on the spot in the field is useful when hunting for mineral specimens… other field tests using an alcohol lab also is fair for screening… flame testing, borax bead testing easily done in the field… only problem with flame tests is ubiquitous Na contamination… overwhelms other colors… These techniques have long been supplanted with modern technology techniques, but hand held XRF starts at 12K, up to 49K plus… not within the reach of a hobbyist. Paying for sample testing with electron microprobe or LA ICP MS also too expensive… have to be certain that what is submitted for testing is worth far more than test costs.
see my post… Thanks
Hi, I’ve just now seen your post and would like to offer my opinion. The second sample/example that you’ve shown resembles an Aragonite specimen that I have which has come from the Tazouta Mine in Morocco, Africa.
My specimen is gray and translucent white. It looks vey much like a tourmaline. It has many of the “piggy back”, “hitchhiker” xtls on it. Measures 8 x 3.5 cm and weighs 195 grams.
I’ve obtained it from the estate of a collector and it was identified and labeled with #7527 on it’s white mark.
I hope that this is helpful as I put these two examples together as soon as I saw yours. All the best, Peter