Strangely beautiful old non-nacreous pearl.

I was thinking that it was possible that it was some kind of botryoidal calcite, but I couldn't clearly see the surface. The explanation is not at all what I would expect!
 
It's an interesting piece anyway, but now I think it will always say to me; 'Don't take things at face value. There are possibilities you haven't imagined.' It's a valuable lesson, and I can see I've lots to learn, so the quest for pearl wisdom continues ;-)
 
It's been a while since I've posted, but I think the mystery is solved... and it does have an aquatic origin. Whilst visiting the jewellery collection in the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, I spied this old amulet which bears a remarkable resemblance to my pendant. It's a dolphin bone amulet, from Southern Spain and should protect the wearer from rheumatism! image.jpeg
 
My mammalogist perspective is this: I look at the amulet and I think, "yes, bone." I look at the specimen and think, "no, definitely not bone." I've never seen a bone that looks like your specimen. There's no rhyme or reason to it's structure. Where would it go in the body? Every bone has a purpose and it's shape is dictated by that purpose. Also, the surface texture is not what bones, even very aged bones, look like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cyril Roger Brossard
Basidiomycota perlus or the strange mushroom pearl
Replies
4
Views
4K
Cyril Roger Brossard
Cyril Roger Brossard
Back
Top