A fourth source for Paraíba: GIA and Gübelin both put Ethiopia on the map

Two laboratories, separate samples, one answer

Until this week that definition had three producing countries behind it: Brazil, where the material was found in the 1980s, and Nigeria and Mozambique, which followed. Ethiopia is the fourth. The two laboratories reached the conclusion independently and on separate material. Gübelin first encountered stones with an unfamiliar chemical signature in early May.

GIA began examining goods represented as Ethiopian in June and later received a parcel of more than one hundred rough and faceted samples for study. Both describe elevated concentrations of vanadium, lead and gallium as the separating markers, and neither has yet published the thresholds; the detailed findings are going to Gems & Gemology.

Three months ago the same trade was told otherwise

What makes this more than a locality note is what the same trade was told three months ago. In June the Swiss Gemmological Institute SSEF reported credible accounts of an Ethiopian deposit and said its own preliminary trace-element work on submitted stones showed considerable overlap with material from previously known localities, particularly Brazil.

SSEF called origin determination on some of those specimens difficult and in some cases inconclusive, and said research was continuing to refine the methods needed to tell the material apart. Two laboratories have now done that work on their own samples and got an answer.

The June position and the August position are not a contradiction; they are the ordinary distance between a first look and a characterised reference set, which in this case took roughly three months.

Origin is most of the price, and nobody has one yet

Origin is not a curiosity in this stone, it is most of the price.

This paper reported on 30 July, from Rapaport's January survey of the trade, that Mozambican Paraíba had moved from around $7,000 a carat to between $10,000 and $12,000, and Brazilian material has always carried a multiple of the African price for the same colour.

A fourth source enters that structure at an unknown place on it.

Nobody has published a price for an Ethiopian stone, no parcel value or carat weight has been made public, and the colours described run wide: blue to bluish green, violet, purple and colourless, many showing colour zoning and compositional variation within a single stone.

A material that varies that much inside itself does not price as one thing.

The report, not the mine, is where this lands

The practical consequence lands on the laboratory report rather than on the mine. Every serious Paraíba trades on an origin call, and until this week a report reading Brazil, Nigeria or Mozambique exhausted the options.

Two laboratories now say the chemistry separates Ethiopian material by vanadium, lead and gallium, and both describe those as measurable rather than exotic determinations.

That is the difference between a discovery that unsettles the trade and one it can absorb: an origin that can be read on ordinary laboratory equipment does not create a permanent doubt over stones already certified.

What it does create is a window, between the announcement and the reference data being published, in which no dealer can be certain which country a stone bought last year came from.