[meteorite-list] Labeling specimens

From: martin goff <msgmeteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 08:50:14 +0000
Message-ID: <2b6f707d1002270050g368264cdsff54cc28beb85633_at_mail.gmail.com>

All,

Thanks for your all your comments on and off list, most interesting. I
think i am being steered
away from directly labelling my stones unless they are NWA or
unclassified. However it seems a bit of a double standard that if i
were to label my specimens myself it would be somehow frowned upon yet
we as collectors value specimens with Nininger/Huss numbers etc. If
for example a specimen was obtained say from the Manchester museum
with one of their recently applied labels on would any of us remove the
label? I very much doubt it, we would prize that specimen as showing
provenance from that collection, that would match their catalogue etc.
etc. In 50 or 100 or however many years that specimen would only get
more and more historical and that label have more and more importance
attached to it.

I suppose my point is that would we now have the same number of
Nininger/Huss etc.labelled stones if they didn't have numbers written
directly on them? If say they had been displayed/sold in a bag or box
with a label but no markings on, over time would some have have been
separated from their boxes/bags and labels? I would hazard a guess
that quite a few would have suffered this fate and now we would be
left with some unidentifiable stones.

Although by saying this i am placing no importance whatsoever on me as
an individual collector or my own numbers as being valuable other than
to avoid the situation of misidentified or unidentified specimens in
the future. As only temporary custodians of our collections surely
making sure that our collections can easily be passed on without any
missing info is of prime importance?

Numbering specimens directly is surely the most foolproof method of
achieving this? All the labels on boxes/bags and display stands etc.
are meaningless when the specimen is removed. All the photos of the
specimen stored either in hard copy or digital form are subject to
being lost or destroyed. I know these are all extreme circumstances
and most of the time these steps that we take will be absolutely fine
as specimens stay with their displays/cards etc. but if there is a
possibility, however small of accidents happening should we not do
more?

As an example of the situation i want to avoid see the photo of the
orphaned stone in the article on a recent visit to the Manchester
museum (http://www.bimsociety.org/article-manchester.shtml) If this
had an original number on it it probably would not be in the situation
its in now. Its more than a distinct possibility that this is stone
from a historical fall and yet we may never know........

Anyway, some food for thought!

Cheers


Martin
Received on Sat 27 Feb 2010 03:50:14 AM PST