╳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
LocalitiesLavrion Mining District, Lavreotiki, East Attica, Attica, Greece
5th Apr 2014 19:49 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
So here goes:
Kolitsch, U., Rieck, B., Brandstätter, F., Schreiber, F., Fabritz, K. H., Blaß, G. & Gröbner, J. (2014): Neufunde aus dem altem Bergbau und den Schlacken von Lavrion (I). Mineralien-Welt 25 (1), 60-75 (in German).
Part 1 of a two-part paper.
The following new finds from the old mines are described (including three new unnamed minerals):
Baileychlor, barahonaite-(Al), bobkingite, brandtite, the unnamed Fe2+-analogue of brandtite, the unnamed Fe2+-analogue of parabrandtite, brucite, claudetite, cornubite, dietrichite, ferrilotharmeyerite, goldichite, krausite, kyrgyzstanite, lahnsteinite, lansfordite, lotharmeyerite, manjiroite, metasideronatrite, nakauriite, nickellotharmeyerite, osakaite, sideronatrite, the unnamed mineral Zn4(SO4)(OH)6•4H2O, paralaurionite, richelsdorfite, slavkovite, a Na-Ca-arsenate, tenorite, vladimirite, the unnamed minera Ca5(AsO4)2(HAsO4)2•5H2O, the unnamed zinc-sulphate-chloride-hydrate Zn9(SO4)2(OH)12Cl2•6H2O.
The article also provides new info and analytical data on:
- Hetaerolite, hydrohetaerolite, miargyrite, molybdänite, pyromorphite, todorokite.
Confirmed and probable misidentifications reported in the literature are:
- Percylite, dufrénite, tooeleite, sophiite.
Sorry, no PDF (and all reprints are already given away). The paper has turned out very nice, with many photos, so this Mineralien-Welt issue and the one below are certainly worthwhile buying (this one also contains articles on new finds from Aris, Namibia).
Kolitsch, U., Rieck, B., Brandstätter, F., Schreiber, F., Fabritz, K. H., Blaß, G. & Gröbner, J. (2014): Neufunde aus dem altem Bergbau und den Schlacken von Lavrion (II). Mineralien-Welt 25 (2), 82-95 (in German).
Part 2 of the two-part paper; reports new finds from the Lavrion slags (including several phases previously unknown to science):
- „Liebenbergite slag dump“
Liebenbergite, schäferite, trevorite, mineral of the whitlockite group, nosean, albite (high albite), Na1.2V3O8, Ni3(VO4)2, barnesite, grantsite, mineral of the pascoite group.
- Pb-slags
Aurichalcite, cuspidine, gearksutite, hedenbergite, hidalgoite, hörnesite, hydrocalumite, clinoatacamite, tooeleite, valentinite, orthorhombic dimorph of barstowite, Pb5(As3+O3)Cl7, Pb2(HAsO3)Cl2, Pb9(H2O)3(As2O5)2Cl10, Pb6Cu(AsO3)2Cl7, NaPb2(CO3)2(OH), Pb-Fe-As-Cl-O-H-phase, hydrocerussite- and plumbonacrite-related phase, unnamed Zn-analogue of schulenbergite, Friedel‘s salt.
Sorry, no PDF (and all reprints are already given away).
All localites have been updated.
Various other new finds are already in the pipeline, and will be announced when they are published.
6th Mar 2015 12:50 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
Zubkova, N. V., Chukanov, N. V., Pekov, I. V., Van, K. V., Pushcharovsky, D. Y., Katerinopoulos, A., Voudouris, P. & Magganas, A. (2015): The crystal structure of the compound Pb6Cu+(AsO3)2Cl7 discovered in the ancient slags of Lavrion, Greece. Zeitschrift für Kristallographie - Crystalline Materials 230, 145-149.
Lead and copper(I) chloride arsenite was found in the ancient metallurgic slag from the Vrissaki area, Lavrion district, Attikí Peninsula, Greece. Its chemical composition corresponds to the idealized formula Pb6Cu+(AsO3)2Cl7. The IR spectrum shows the presence of AsO33- anions and only a trace amount of O–H bonds. The crystal structure was solved by direct methods and refined to R(F) = 0.0304 based on 1778 unique reflections with I > 2σ(I). The compound is trigonal (rhombohedral), R-3, a = 9.8691(2), c = 34.2028(13) Å, V = 2885.01(14) Å3, Z = 6. Two crystallographically non-equivalent As3+ cations occupy apexes of the AsO3 pyramids. Cu+ cation occupies an apex of the CuCl3 pyramid. The group [Cl3Cu–AsO3] is arranged along the c axis. Pb cations occupy two sites with seven- and eight-fold coordination. The crystal-chemical formula of the compound is Pb6(Cu+Cl3)(As3+O3)2Cl4.
Page updated.
5th Sep 2015 19:46 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
See http://www.mindat.org/gallery-4211.html
and
http://www.mindat.org/gallery-21446.html
More news on the ore mineralogy soon.
15th Sep 2015 11:26 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
Kolitsch, U., Rieck, B. and Voudouris, P. (2015): Mineralogy and genesis of the Lavrion ore deposit: new insights from the study of ore and accessory minerals. MinPet 2015, Leoben, Austria, September 10-13; abstract in Mitt. Österr. Mineral. Ges. 161, 66 (abs.).
All abstracts of this conference downloadable here:
http://www.uibk.ac.at/mineralogie/oemg/bd_161/bd_161_13-144.pdf
Mindat pages will be updated.
6th Sep 2018 16:17 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
Rieck, B., Kolitsch, U., Voudouris, P., Giester, G. and Tzeferis, P. (2018): Weitere Neufunde aus Lavrion, Griechenland. Mineralien-Welt 29 (5), 32-77 (in German).
with numerous photos and many crystal drawings is now published; I have updated all localities.
The issue is available from the Mineralien-Welt website.
6th Sep 2018 17:58 UTCClosed Account 🌟
28th Oct 2018 17:23 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
http://rruff.info/uploads/MW25_82.pdf
12th Feb 2020 15:28 UTCClosed Account 🌟
In the past weeks I have restructured and cleaned up the Lavrion Mining District. Most of the feedback I have received until now is positive which is heartening.
All areas now have their respective boundaries, and with very few exceptions every locality has the GPS coordinates set.
There is still much work to be done: some of the boundaries may need additional clarification or may need to be moved a little, a lot of photos need to be moved or changed and finally, there need a lot of descriptions to be written or brought to the latest status.
There are however a few issues that need to be resolved that I do not want to do without community participation.
Does it make sense to add localities like "Noria Shaft No. 19", "Noria Shaft No. 20", "Noria Shaft No. 21"?
My thoughts to this are:
it is very unlikely that any given specimen comes from the actual shaft (e.g.: when the shaft was sunk), but they rather come from the mine that was served by the shaft. In the above case that would be the Noria Mine.
My suggestion in this case would be to have the Noria Mine as a locality and to note the shafts (including their GPS data) in the description section.
So, for me the answer to the above question is "NO" and I would remove any such localities that are already there.
Does it make sense to add localities like "Hilarion Mine No. 4", "Hilarion Mine No. 50"?
My thoughts to this are:
The borders between these areas within the mines are not clearly defined and more often than not heavily debated among local collectors. Basically, while often one local guide would attribute a specimen to the e.g.: Hilarion Mine No. 50 another would attribute it to a different number. The maps that would clarify the borders between the individual mine sections have long gone missing and most information you can get is local lore. The Hilarion Mine No. 50 is an especially good example of why we should refrain from using such designations as it was used by some collectors to hide the true locality of one of their finds.
My suggestion in this case again would be to note the mine sections in the description. In this case I would also suggest to leave one such mine section as a separate locality – Christiana 132 – because this one is so entrenched in the literature (some of it my own when I did not know better) that it would confuse our audience.
So, the answer to the question is be "NO – but…" and I would remove any such localities that are already there.
I want to see this post as the beginning of a discussion (or the renewed discussion from an older thread) that should lead to a generally accepted strategy for the future. I guess Jolyon should finally have the deciding voice in this.
And finally, a question: how many languages do you need to turn the locality health check green?
Cheers,
Branko
12th Feb 2020 17:29 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
12th Feb 2020 19:42 UTCKevin Conroy Manager
15th Mar 2020 20:24 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager
8th May 2020 15:16 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
9th May 2020 17:43 UTCClosed Account 🌟
8th May 2020 15:47 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
However, it's perfectly fine for site photos - if we have photos of the shaft itself for example, then they should live here.
18th Apr 2021 18:40 UTCPiet van Kalmthout Expert
I should like to propose to combine two Laurion lists of minerals.
Laurion is a district with hundreds of mines and a lot of slag locations. Underground most mines are connecting each other. In the whole district silver containing galenite was mined. From 3000 BC till 1978 AD there was a very big industrial activity. Ore furnaces were placed just close to the mines, but also along the coast. So you can say the locations of the slags (and the slagminerals) were part of the whole region. The location of the Liebenbergite dump is even in the middle of mine entrances.
So I should like to propose to have only one list for the whole district: the list so called:
https://www.mindat.org/loc-14187.html
The list https://www.mindat.org/loc-1942.html can be removed.
The list of specific slagminerals https://www.mindat.org/loc-8370.html can stay. As you know most Laurion slagminerals are described already a long time ago, and stay for that reason accepted minerals (decision IMA 1995).With regards
Piet van Kalmthout
18th Apr 2021 19:17 UTCClosed Account 🌟
30th Sep 2021 08:38 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder
https://www.mindat.org/mesg-321172.html
I need your input before continuing.
8th Dec 2022 18:37 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
8th Dec 2022 22:18 UTCEddy Vervloet Manager
12th Feb 2023 19:37 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 27, 2024 02:07:02