Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Welch, M. Search for Related Content

Strunz, H. and Nickel, E.H. Strunz Mineralogical Tables, 9^th Edition.

Berlin and Stuttgart (E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung). 2001, 870 pp. Price 148.00 (US$142.00). ISBN 3 510 65188 X and

Lima de Faria, J. Structural Classification of Minerals, Volume 1. Dordrecht (Kluwer Academic Publishers). 2001, 143 pp. Price £37.00, ISBN 0 792 36892 4.

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

I was asked to review these two closely-related books by making a comparison.

I will refer to the former as ‘Strunz’ and to the latter as ‘SCM’. Strunz is a complete single book, whereas SCM is in three volumes. Volume 1 of SCM deals with minerals having general ‘formulae’ of A, A_mB_n and A_pB_qC_r and no molecular H₂O (960 species), Volume 2 minerals with formulae A_pB_qC_rD_sE_xF_yG_z and no molecular H₂O, and Volume 3 does the rest with molecular H₂O. I was only given Volume 1 of SCM to review.

Key objectives of any attempt to classify minerals include: (1) to be comprehensive, but defining a few discriminating categories that allow minor variants to be included; (2) to achieve a balance between rigour and utility, formality/informality; (3) to achieve an ease of understanding and usage; (4) flexibility for the incorporation of new species; (4) the recognition of old and emergence of new structural themes and variations (didactic); (5) to allow ready integration into the literature. Objective 2 is particularly significant if one is to encourage adoption of the classification, rather than leave it as a mere abstraction. Looking at the two books under review here, I was immediately struck by their different emphases with regard to objective 2. Strunz attempts to present an attractive, user-friendly accessible approach, whereas SCM is more rigorous in the development of a somewhat ‘heavy’ and perhaps cumbersome exhaustive notation for structural formulae that I found unattractive (more on this later). In this regard, SCM can be seen as ‘purist’ in its aims, while Strunz is ‘populist’. That is not to say that Strunz lacks rigour. This distinction is exemplified by the use of 226 good-quality . . . [Full Text of this Article]