When can copal be called amber, and is there any difference anyhow?

It seems that the controversy surrounding the so-called ‘Green Amber’ will not go away. Even the experts -- gemmologists and scientists – cannot agree.

Most of the controversy hinges on the question of whether one should differentiate between the young resin which gemmologists refer to as copal, and the older, more mature material called amber. Scientists say that it is splitting hairs to try to differentiate, while gemmologists say that there is good reason to differentiate because the public has a right to know what it is buying.

Some facts are clear, as follows:

The process by which plant resin matures to become ‘amber’ is a continuum. There is no dividing line or specific age at which we can definitely say that the material becomes amber.
Young resins are less stable than older ones. The process of polymerisation is incomplete, volatiles are still evaporating, and the material is, in effect, still drying out. This causes the surface to shrink and subsequently flake away. The younger resins are also more susceptible than mature material to excessive heat or solvents.
Natural green amber does not exist, and any material on the market that appears green has been subjected to some kind of treatment.
Some of the clear, green material on the market today may be old, mature amber which has been treated, but by far the greatest percentage is derived from South American ‘copal’ – usually Colombian – which is reckoned to be only about 300 years old.

It is clear that, from one point of view, the scientists are largely correct when they say that the differences among the various resins are very small, no matter what their age, and that the names ‘amber’ and ‘copal’ are meaningless. They deal with many more resins than we see in jewellery or the decorative arts, and it would be impossible and meaningless for them to put definitive labels on them all.

However gemmologists deal with just a few resins – those that we see on the market. And the gemmologist’s concern is for the customers and the stability of the product that they buy. Gemmologists – if they cannot tell by sight -- differentiate by testing the reactions of any given resin to heat, solvents, and so forth. They wish to put labels on the materials in order to alert people to the fact that some items may not keep their original form for very long. All resins will degrade with time, but while ‘ambers’ can take hundreds of years to disintegrate, ‘copal’ can do so in tens of years.

It has recently been agreed by a body of experts that when a resin has been subjected to treatment and turned green, and simple testing does not immediately show whether the original material was young or old, the resulting material can be called ‘Green Amber’. Many people are worried by this decision. The long-term stability of this relatively new material is, as yet, not known. The general public is under the impression that ‘amber’ is millions of years old. To sell a material that is only 300 years old (and may not be stable), as ‘amber’, seems to most gemmologists to be misleading.

At a time when we are in constant battle to ensure that there is disclosure regarding gem treatments, Organic Gems fears that this is a step backwards and a licence to blur the issue.

We do not argue with the scientists, but we suggest that there is a different angle that should be taken into account.

The Editor

There are several in-depth articles in 'Organic Gems' that deal with amber, including 'Green amber'. Subscriptions are free!

Click HERE to register.