Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic Time
搜索矿物的性质搜索矿物的化学Advanced Locality Search随意显示任何一 种矿物Random Locality使用minID搜索邻近产地Search Articles搜索词汇表更多搜索选项
╳Discussions
💬 Home🔎 Search📅 LatestGroups
EducationOpen discussion area.Fakes & FraudsOpen discussion area.Field CollectingOpen discussion area.FossilsOpen discussion area.Gems and GemologyOpen discussion area.GeneralOpen discussion area.How to ContributeOpen discussion area.Identity HelpOpen discussion area.Improving Mindat.orgOpen discussion area.LocalitiesOpen discussion area.Lost and Stolen SpecimensOpen discussion area.MarketplaceOpen discussion area.MeteoritesOpen discussion area.Mindat ProductsOpen discussion area.Mineral ExchangesOpen discussion area.Mineral PhotographyOpen discussion area.Mineral ShowsOpen discussion area.Mineralogical ClassificationOpen discussion area.Mineralogy CourseOpen discussion area.MineralsOpen discussion area.Minerals and MuseumsOpen discussion area.PhotosOpen discussion area.Techniques for CollectorsOpen discussion area.The Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryOpen discussion area.UV MineralsOpen discussion area.Recent Images in Discussions
GeneralAncient Malachite Carvings
8th Jul 2016 19:14 UTCJohn Dougal
I am brand new to the forum and stumbled across it as I was completing some research on malachite. I truly believe it is one of the most beautiful minerals in the world!
I collect ancient artifacts, primarily from Asia. A large portion of my collection now consists of stunning works of art carved in malachite. Based on the iconography/style I would place this between 4,000 and 2,000 BCE and in the region of what is Inner Mongolia.
The two pieces I would like to share with you are my largest, and I would like to get a feel from anyone on the board as to whether they have ever seen malachite carvings that look anything like this. Please see how the artist was able to incorporate the natural banding of the malachite into the piece of art. This I feel is genius and nearly baffling to me.
The first item is what is known in ancient Asia as a zhulong, or pig dragon, is 56 x 43cm and weighs over 28kg! It is thick and solid!
The second item is a bird of prey totem (hawk or eagle), is 51 x 41cm and weighs in at 23kg.
Can you imagine the size of the raw material necessary to carve these pieces. Does raw material in this size and quality even exist any more? I am not new to ancient art, but I am new to the world of minerals so your expertise is very much appreciated.
It's hard to describe the feeling handling these masterpieces. I truly hope the pictures do it justice. Thanks in advance for any insightful comments you can offer.
Cheers,
John
8th Jul 2016 22:22 UTCRob Woodside 🌟 Manager
8th Jul 2016 22:51 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
But it is quite possible somewhere in modern China later of 80th of XX century.
There aren't any source of malachite of such size and quality in whole China (+Mongolia and Siberia).
Such malachite able to come only from Kongo. We all know, when these locality was discovered.
Of course you may to fooling yourself as long as you want, but these items are obvious modern fakes.(td)(td)(td)
8th Jul 2016 22:52 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
The HongShan culture was a Jade culture as well, and was only recently discovered (1937). It would seem to have been the bridging culture into the bronze age (and compelling article was written about how brass may have been a precursor to bronze there), so, certainly they would have been familiar with this material at some point, but I can find no academic literature that suggests it was ever a material used for carvings, and seemingly no suggestions nor evidence of artifacts being recovered made of this material.
I do see there is a lot of malachite carvings on ebay and etsy "claiming" to be ancient Chinese artifacts from HongShan Dynasty. Color me skeptical.
MRH
8th Jul 2016 23:11 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
8th Jul 2016 23:15 UTCMark Heintzelman 🌟 Expert
Thankfully, there is still no shortage of good material coming from that region!
8th Jul 2016 23:20 UTCBob Harman
9th Jul 2016 02:25 UTCJohn Dougal
I added a illustrative statistic below that most are unaware of and that is the absolutely insane amount of construction (destruction) and concrete use China has experienced over the past few years. I won't go into the economics of why they're doing it here since it's not the appropriate forum, but whenever this unprecedented amount of building occurs, ungodly amounts of earth is moved. The laws are strict yet filled with loopholes when it comes to ownership and sale of items found when unearthing tombs. So to me, logically, it makes absolute sense that there has been a flood of these items on the market during this same period.
There are some dig site pictures I've seen that show malachite objects positioned around and buried with the bones. The iconography of all the pieces I have match with the period culture, and with no modern tooling. There is minor pitting if you are able to observe up close and I can since I have a stereo microscope with 270x magnification. To note, these tombs were lime slabs so they preserved everything very well.
I shared the two largest I have although I also have many others over a kg each that have the same artistry/iconography of that period etc. I also have an enormous collection of jade, agate and meteoric glass from that period.
I won't say what I paid for them, but I'm curious how much you think it would cost to pay a modern artist in china or elsewhere to locate a huge slab of malachite of this quality and whittle it down to these beautiful objects; all while incorporating ONLY primitive methods of tooling and also incorporating the natural striations/circles of the malachite into the piece.
And to Bob, these are definitely not anything but malachite. I have moved them around several times over the past few days and have nearly pulled my back doing so. :) Again, 28 and 23kg respectively.
More comments are very welcome please.
9th Jul 2016 03:24 UTCMatt Courville
9th Jul 2016 03:48 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
once again you convinced nobody.
Ancient and medieval Chinese culture hadn't expirience of works with malachite carving. Malachite as whole was entered into world carving culture by Russian jewelers in the middle of XVIII century after discovery large malachite masses of gem quality in Mednorudyansk deposit.
If you want to carve some material, you must to have some natural source of this material.
The closest to China deposit of malachite of quality, comparable with your items, is known in Salair range. But this malachite was discovered on Kamenushinskoe deposit only couple years ago - http://webmineral.ru/deposits/gallery.php?id=3042&filter=21189&page=2. This is completely new deposit with no traces of ancient or medieval mining.
Trade connections between China and Central Africa in ancient times is nonsence. Chinese reaches Africa coast only in Ming times, not earlier.
There aren't any deposit on China territory (and surrounding territories) from where malachite of such size and quality may to be mined. Otherwice malachite carved items would be well and long ago known to archeologists and art specialists. What we don't observe. Moreover, malachite isn't too popular in China carving material. This explained by very short period of its appearing on Chinese market.
From my point of view, it is impossible to don't like malachite. But Russia had 2.5 century of time to appreciate and love this material.
The next steps of Chinese fakemakers will become "ancient" carved items from lazurite, rhodonite, labradorite and finally charoite... :-D:-D:-D "unearthed in tombs"...
By the way, I suppose, that big part of yours "jade, agate and meteoric glass" (especially the later) are the same modern fakes, if you received them from the same sources. So traces of work on them can be identical.
Did you ever visit rock carving workshop in China? Their technology very often includes only primitive methods of tooling.:-D
9th Jul 2016 04:18 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
Look at outer surface of the malachite aggregate http://www.mindat.org/photo-270351.html (lover part of the slab). The sample occurs in dumps about 150 years after initial extracting from mother rock.
Ground waters of Inner Mongolia are saline. So formation of new formed atacamite over malachite is very probable.
If we even assume that these items are genuine, they must to be cleaned and repolished. I don't see any traces of alteration or long contact with ground on your items.
9th Jul 2016 07:34 UTCJohn Dougal
I'm still looking for anyone to rationalize the economics behind the subject. So let's see; Chinese artist way out in country-side finds raw exporter of massive high quality chunk of malachite in Africa and has it shipped to him/her. Artist then proceeds to pain-mistakenly carve it without the use of modern tools into an icon that is little known to most people in the hope that someone, like me, will send a buyer searching across the country-side to locate this piece and ship it to me? All for a very low relative price. Does this make any sense to you? Again, how can anyone sustain themselves on what most likely is a negative ROI? To me, the answer is simple. There was no import, there was no labor involved in carving it, and the only cost involved is a finders fee for the middle man and shipping cost to me.
This is just my rationalization of how such a piece can be acquired for what it was acquired for. You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I did ask for it so please feel free to retort.
Cheers,
John
9th Jul 2016 08:28 UTCDoug Daniels
We don't know what you paid for the pieces, and really is none of our business. If they really were obtained at a low cost, then they likely are not true ancient artifacts (even the Chinese aren't dumb). If they were made recently, then how could a lowly Chinese carver make them and make money? (And, some of us are aware of where, and when, LARGE chunks of malachite suitable for carving could be obtained.) Look at all the stuff being made in China and sent to the U.S. (and elsewhere) for sale. Still, they are nice pieces; they may actually be worth more than you paid. Remember, we are a mineral site, not an artisinal valuation site. And, we are giving our opinions.....
9th Jul 2016 09:30 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
9th Jul 2016 09:33 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
no something personal. Probably my English isn't too perfect. Often I am feeling, that people understand my texts under slightly another angle then I write them.
I would like to say you one simple thing. There are things probable, unlikely and absolutely incredible. As I can to see, you inclined to chose the last scenario for your believing.
I am collector with 40 years expirience and saw a lot of fakes of any kinds. I don't try to invent any explanations, why this coin http://www.ebay.com/itm/CHINA-ANCIENT-JIN-DYNASTY-COIN-OLD-BRONZE-MONEY-Zheng-Long-Yuan-Bao-/112050723535?hash=item1a16be5acf:g:-6QAAOSwbYZXaezu is so cheap. I simply know, that it is fake. In other words, I know how rare is genuine item of such type, how it must to looks like and how much it can to cost.
In completely other words, any Chinese seller who propose numismatic material not from time to time, but constantly, knows real price of this rare variety, and never ask so funny price for it.
Your hope in impossible is so large... Frankly speaking, I wouldn't believe my own eyes even in case if these items would be excavated from underground on my eyes.
It is interesting, which explanation you'll try to invent for explain of origin of such "prehistorical find" - http://www.ebay.com/itm/Carved-Charoite-Crystal-Quan-Yin-/251984925803?hash=item3aab78d46b:g:gdAAAOSw3xJVcewv Everybody knows, that charoite was started use as gem stone in 1976. It was unknown before.
Situation with malachite is absolutely the same.
9th Jul 2016 14:13 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
In China anything is carved and a lot is faked.
9th Jul 2016 14:17 UTCMatt Courville
Please if you don't already know to do this - avoid e-bay at all costs for anything other than someones's granparent's old clock for example. In the ancient coin world this site has become a plague for sincere collectors, but at least I can be certain of about 12 or so techniques for ID-ing a fake coin. Perhaps you should try and figure-out some techniques to either prove or disprove what you have in mind for your various carving pieces. I've linked a site with a messageboard which you might find more insight into your items. It has a specific area for antiquities which is the area I linked you to. Hope this helps.
Matt
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?board=48.0
9th Jul 2016 16:19 UTCJohn Dougal
This is exactly what I was looking for; other views and perspectives to give me the motivation to continue my research. I need to remain objective while leveraging the scientific method although don't want to discount something because it's never been officially documented before. But that's where my research must continue.
I have much larger and heavier examples of nephrite jade carvings that are definite 'head-scratchers' but I'll keep those under wraps for now. :)
I will definitely continue to check out your great site since one of my earliest fascinations was collecting rocks/minerals and meteorites. Thanks again.
Cheers,
John
10th Jul 2016 01:00 UTCGreg Dainty
10th Jul 2016 03:02 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
But you demonstrated me again, that my English is bad. :-( I unable adequately to translate the first part of your sentence (with vocabulary and on-line translator). I don't know grammar enough, too complicated construction for me.
We all gathered there for communication, and education through it. If it wouldn't be interesting for us, we would find some other pastimes.
In any case, I am glad, that my opinions are interesting to somebody out there. Probably because of not too much who interested in them here. At least this helps in keeping my English at the same bad level, without its deterioration.;-)
10th Jul 2016 06:42 UTCHerwig Pelckmans
Your English is not bad, it is improving. :-)
The first part of the sentence of Greg, written in less complicated English:
"Pavel, for a long time now I wanted to let you know, your posts ..."
I can only agree: your posts are a real pleasure to read and very educational. People like you really improve the communications on Mindat.
We can only hope other people like you will join and "speak up".
Thanks again,
Cheers, Herwig
10th Jul 2016 11:16 UTCUwe Ludwig
1. In Chinese say: “A copy is so good as the original”. Generally Chinese have a total different feeling to fakes compared to the Western people.
2. Chinese are excellent craftsmen. When they copy an ancient subject they make it so good that only experts can evaluate it.
3. In such a high populated country as China it is nearly impossible to make a secretly unearthing and it is absolutely forbidden to have private unearthing. In China all ground is state owned. So for example in the region around the unopened tomb hills near Xian (and every where) agricultural activities except of fruit plants are forbidden.
4. Around this tomb hills there are a lot of dealers which present their stone carved objects (polluted with clay) as “very old” and “fresh unearthed”. Unbelievable that the officials would allow this because the exporting of historical objects is also strictly forbidden. Only some official antique dealers make a government seal on the bills which allow the export.
At last I think the surface of the showed objects is too fresh for an unearthed object.
Best Regards
Uwe Ludwig
10th Jul 2016 14:41 UTCRolf Luetcke Expert
I always like your comments on all the threads you comment on. I am only fluent in two languages and Russian is not one of them.
I agree with all the comments about the malachite carvings being recent.
I have often been amazed at how many things people fake, some don't seem worth the time to create.
A couple of examples. Galena geodes which are interesting but just wrong.
Silver wires glued to matrix sold as Mexican specimens. A friend put one in water overnight to soften all the grime, only to find all the wires on the bottom and the white glue showing. I am sure many know how rare matrix diamonds are and how few sold are actually genuine.
The list is too long.
These carvings we see at the shows and people can make any claim to sell them, even have full documentation along with them, also fake. Always informative to read.
Rolf
10th Jul 2016 16:06 UTCJohn Dougal
I continued to evaluate the malachite pieces I have and while someone obviously cleaned them up, under closer examination there is definite tine pitting throughout each piece that is clearly visible under 10x magnification. This pitting would be impossible to fake based on the the sheer number, size and while keeping the overall finish of the malachite intact.
Pavel - you definitely seem to know a lot about how other minerals/water/etc. would impact malachite over time. What I'm trying to understand is whether the pitting I see is something that could potentially happen in <80 year period of time. The 80 year period is boxing to the period in which the first Hongshan discovery took place.
If it even takes hundreds of years before something like this happens then I'll know it likely is not a modern piece. Then I would continue my research to determine if a later Chinese culture, in appreciation of the iconography, created it.
Anyone's help here would be greatly appreciated!
Also, to Uwe. Thank you very much for your response.
In response to point #1: Understood and agreed. With these pieces however, they are minimally not copies and while some will argue are not genuinely ancient, they cannot be copies of something that didn't exist before it. Copy of a ming vase? Of course. Copy of a 28kg giant malachite zhulong/pig dragon? I say show me the original if a 'copy'.
In response to point #2: Again, you can't copy that of which doesn't already exist.
In response to point #3: There are several 'loop-holes' in Chinese law that allow these goods to be passed and sold on the market. They may not actually be loop-holes per se, but it does allow unearthed items to be legally sold after the point they leave the hands of the person who originally found them.
In response to point #4: When all of these items are shipped out, every package, every one, states the content is stone art, artware, art, etc. I was always curious why they did so until I looked into it further and realized it was more of a method to cover their arses.
Cheers,
John
10th Jul 2016 19:51 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
-------------------------------------------------------
> In response to point #1: Understood and agreed.
> With these pieces however, they are minimally not
> copies and while some will argue are not genuinely
> ancient, they cannot be copies of something that
> didn't exist before it. Copy of a ming vase? Of
> course. Copy of a 28kg giant malachite
> zhulong/pig dragon? I say show me the original if
> a 'copy'.
>
> In response to point #2: Again, you can't copy
> that of which doesn't already exist.
>
Dear John,
it looks like, that you are not familiar with the concept of "fantasy". It means modern fake object which haven't real hystorical prototype. A lot of such fantasies are manufactured In China from early Republican times.
In Russian numismatic typical example of such fantasy is "rouble of tsaritsa Sophia" - https://yandex.ru/images/search?img_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.russian-money.ru%2F%28X%281%29S%28qlmk1g55c4ts4k55fenyg145%29%29%2FUsersImages%2FArticles%2F4%2FUser%2FPetr_Ich.jpg&text=%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%BB%D1%8C%20%D1%86%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%8B%20%D0%A1%D0%BE%D1%84%D1%8C%D0%B8&noreask=1&pos=1&lr=213&rpt=simage
Some Chinese fantastic coins from my personal collection:
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=25139
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=43630
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=36611 no any iron coin was cast in Ming times
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=49167
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=43631
Fantasies from auctions:
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=147369
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=109946
http://www.ebay.com/itm/CHINA-LIAO-DYNASTY-907-1125-AD-CASH-O-TIAN-CHAO-WAN-SHU-AU158-/122020305026?hash=item1c68fa1882:g:vnYAAOSwmtJXZnnD
Unfortunately topic of fantasies is endless one.
John Dougal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In response to point #4: When all of these items are shipped out,
> every package, every one, states the content is stone art, artware,
> art, etc. I was always curious why they did so until I looked into it
> further and realized it was more of a method to cover their arses.
:-D:-D:-D The main "a method to cover their arses" is exactly selling of copies and fantasies instead of real antique items. Everybody knows this, but you don't want to understand this.
10th Jul 2016 20:48 UTCJohn Dougal
I was looking for a scientific approach here, not an opinion-based anecdotal diatribe of your past experience with shotty old spoof coins. I understand what fantasy items are but in the case of the zhulong/pig dragon iconography of the Hongshan, there are many examples in existence in museums, although not necessarily of that media. So because a communist regime doesn't have it on display in a museum means that it doesn't exist or has never existed?
I was really looking forward to you answering my question regarding the time required to begin breaking down malachite (into the pitting I'm observing) but instead received something else. It appears I've exhausted resources on this forum. Upwards and onward.
10th Jul 2016 22:00 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
> With these pieces however, they are minimally not
> copies and while some will argue are not genuinely
> ancient, they cannot be copies of something that
> didn't exist before it. Copy of a ming vase? Of
> course. Copy of a 28kg giant malachite
> zhulong/pig dragon? I say show me the original if
> a 'copy'.
and practically immediately after that you wrote:
> I understand what fantasy items are but in the case of the
> zhulong/pig dragon iconography of the Hongshan, there
> are many examples in existence in museums, although
> not necessarily of that media.
Sorry, but you don't understand what fake items are, in such case. What it is - an enlarged copy of known before zhulong dragon, made of wrong materials (of malachite in this case) and wrong sizes, as not classic case of a fake!? What is fake in your understanding?
My friends are involved in scientific expertize of painting. The single streak made by paint with wrong pigment in its composition is able to questioned the authenticity of whole picture. You have on hands 60-pound pieces of wrong stone and you still believe...
Unfortunately I see, that you are from a number of persons, who inclined to believe such items in stones as traces of prehistorical civilizations.
and don't find more sense for me to participate in the discussion.
Success in your endeavors!
10th Jul 2016 22:28 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
I think Pavel is getting frustrated because you are ignoring the key facts here - that this cannot be an ancient malachite carving because there was NO ancient malachite carving of material like this in China in the past because there was no source for the material at the time in China.
That, added to the fact that Malachite *quickly* degrades (years or decades not centuries) when exposed to groundwater, as anyone who has collected malachite in the field will tell you means that, and I will be clear with this.
It is impossible that these malachite carvings are ancient chinese carvings.
I understand this is not what you want to hear, but you did ask...
10th Jul 2016 22:45 UTCStephanie Martin
This has so far been a polite discussion and that is good. Please do not interpret Pavel's direct scientific method as smugness. As a scientist he is offering facts and expert opinion.
Yes it can happen that sometimes experts may be wrong, as they are human like all of us. But in the end they are experts because they are mostly right when discussing their field of experience.
While you want to believe that your carvings are authentic, the parameters suggest otherwise. You hold out false hope. The pitting proves nothing really, I have modern pieces that are pitted. How long was the rough exposed to oxidation before being carved? No one can know. But an original patina, had it existed might tell us something. If it has been polished off there is nothing to test.
The carvings would still be worth something as decorative pieces if not authentic. But to me they scream fake. My undergrad study was in ancient civilizations. While I am not an expert in antiquities, these just don't offer up any suggestion to be legit artifacts. If they are around 100 years old you might get away with calling them antique, but not ancient, and not artifacts of archeological value.
Enjoy your carvings.
Kind regards,
stephanie
11th Jul 2016 00:45 UTCRolf Luetcke Expert
I come from a scientific background and worked in animal behavior for many years.
I also have worked with minerals for nearly 50 years.
In that time I have attempted to educate people who wish something to be what they think.
Two cases in point. I met a young couple collecting gold in a stream and I was teaching a nature class. They came to me during a break and showed me the gold they had just collected on top of the sand in the stream. No matter how much I tried to show them it was not gold, they didn't believe me. I finally shrugged my shoulders and gave up.
This happened with a story I wrote about finding a mine tunnel full of minerals under a house I used to own. I gave it to the person I sold the house to just for fun of something I wrote about that house.
Two years later a man stopped by my store and started telling me my story about the mineral find under the house. I smiled and told him it was my story to the letter. Again he wouldn't believe me. Same as with the gold, no matter how much I tried to convince him he choose to believe the story was real.
Some people one just has to step back and let them believe what they want.
Yes, this site has very knowledgeable people but some don't choose to believe them.
My only answer is that everyone is allowed their opinion as long as they don't try and push it down my throat.
Think it is time to end this thread it is only treading water.
Rolf
11th Jul 2016 02:58 UTCJohn Dougal
11th Jul 2016 09:13 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
11th Jul 2016 23:40 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
12th Jul 2016 00:44 UTCDoug Daniels
12th Jul 2016 01:08 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
12th Jul 2016 05:44 UTCChristian Auer 🌟 Expert
12th Jul 2016 12:45 UTCMatt Courville
:-D
12th Jul 2016 13:03 UTCWayne Corwin
They also say "Junk is JUNK" :)-D
12th Jul 2016 13:10 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
Maybe he deleted the images, but if you search
ancient chinese malachite artifacts
on google, you come straight here.
12th Jul 2016 16:02 UTCReinhardt van Vuuren
12th Jul 2016 16:09 UTCRob Woodside 🌟 Manager
12th Jul 2016 16:13 UTCReinhardt van Vuuren
12th Jul 2016 16:14 UTCAndrew Debnam 🌟
12th Jul 2016 16:36 UTCMatt Courville
I expect denial from someone who was just told that their prized treasures were fake, and feel quite bad for anyone who gets ripped-off. This might actually be a good thread idea:
Fake minerals that I bought (or that my 'friend' bought). The best way to determine and weed out fakes has to be looking at many of them to see the all of the faults, and bring them to the public arena.
12th Jul 2016 16:46 UTCDoug Schonewald
Those are two of them for sure
12th Jul 2016 17:21 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
Somebody in US spent time to made freshly purchased item from eBay old looking.
12th Jul 2016 19:54 UTCJohn Dougal
I was honestly just trying to get more details and adding to the information I already have. If they end up being fakes, moderns, fantasy objects or whatever nomenclature you care to disparage then I'm fine with it as long as I can conclude it for myself. Money is not an issue here nor is time, hence the reason I will never sell them. Good luck to you all with each of your future endeavors.
12th Jul 2016 20:07 UTCAndrew Debnam 🌟
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot/a-chinese-malachite-carving-of-a-lotus-5208642-details.aspx
12th Jul 2016 20:38 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
But Christie's didn't states, that the item is ancient or even of Qing times. They say that the leaf is modern carved.
12th Jul 2016 20:57 UTCAndrew Debnam 🌟
12th Jul 2016 21:36 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager
Sometimes we found within natural layered materials examples of pictures with astounding grade of detalization.
So the malachite eagle is unique and valuable specimen. But only not ancient.
12th Jul 2016 22:27 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager
版权所有© mindat.org1993年至2024年,除了规定的地方。 Mindat.org全赖于全球数千个以上成员和支持者们的参与。
隐私政策 - 条款和条款细则 - 联络我们 - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: 2024.4.18 09:16:48
隐私政策 - 条款和条款细则 - 联络我们 - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: 2024.4.18 09:16:48