Geographical origin of the stones: opinions (well-founded, at times!), but only opinions
"Colombian emeralds are the most beautiful!", "The real Burmese rubies have a 'pigeon blood' color", "Sapphires with the 'velvet' nuance are certainly from Kashmir" ...
These are some of the statements I have heard over the years even by several insiders and I feel sorry not just because we often hear authentic nonsense from those who should educate customers while they talk without knowing what they are saying, but, more importantly, because the emphasis – which has become almost maniacal - assigned to the geographical origin of a gem distracts the public from the authentic magic of colors.
First, why has geographical origin become so important for colored stones? The answer is simple even if inconvenient: since the ability to recognize Beauty has diminished over time, the market has redefined the pricing system according to the real or presumed rarity of the gemological material, and depicting a prevailing - and allow me, misleading - equivalence between geographical origin and value of a gem, regardless of the real quality of the gem itself. Actually, we have got to a point where the definition of "Burmese ruby" is incredibly accepted on the market to describe a ruby that has no scientific certification of origin but has a color that the trade recognizes as typical of Burmese rubies: in other words, Burma has become a color and no longer a geographical area (now the state of Myanmar); it is not true that Colombian emeralds are all beautiful, extraction is still flourishing and only the top quality gems are rare; most Burmese rubies are of a much lower quality than the best specimens of Mozambique and also of Tanzania, and 99% of Burmese rubies do not have 'pigeon blood' color, which – by the way - is far from being unanimously identified and accurate.
No question that all the important scientific studies accomplished since the Second World War in order to classify colored crystals according to their origin (especially for the so-called precious stones) have had enormous merit. Grouping common features of high quality specimens allows to increase knowledge, hence also to better explain the natural events that fascinate and excite the human being so much. In other words, the analysis of geographical origins helps -in principle - to scientifically explain the characteristics of a crystal. From here to make it the main source of value, the step is as unnatural as it is incorrect: most Burmese rubies are of low quality, they are ugly, and many must undergo a heating treatment in order to express a pleasant color; on the other hand, when a Mozambican ruby has high quality characteristics, when it is beautiful, there is no reason why it should be valued less because it is not from Burma. The recent market strive for Thai rubies proves the erroneous mythization of the geographical origin!!
Moreover, when it comes to the issue of provenance, are we talking about the place where the crystallization process took place or where the raw material was extracted? If we expect absolute certainties, then the game is lost at start: remembering that natural crystallization occurs in millions of years and that the continental drift has changed the orographic structure of the world in a radical way over the course of 200 million years, it would be almost impossible to decide - for example - whether a rough sapphire found in Sri Lanka could not have had its genesis in the terrestrial substratum of Madagascar; if, on the other hand, we had to rely on the source of extraction, the only witness that can be trusted would be the miner who physically extracted the rough but immediately this would raise a question "… who cares? ..."
Therefore, what matters the most is to recover the ability to know and recognize beauty, meaning the technical and emotional quality regardless of geographical origin. Problem with colored stones, however, is that the technical-gemological aspects are in part classifiable in standard reference but in (large) part they cannot, as opposed to diamonds. It is no coincidence, in fact, that no one asks for the geographical origin of a diamond!
For colored stones, study, passion and a lot of experience are needed to be able to judge their quality… which can never be replaced by the origin, even if stated in a laboratory certificate.
A final observation: gemological laboratories report "opinions" on the origin due to the impossibility of absolute certainty and, be careful, there are very few labs equipped with the most sophisticated scientific tools, hence able to empirically support their opinions.
To make a long story short, the laboratory statements regarding the geographical origin are only opinions and not necessarily always founded, so let's take them and treat them as such!