|
THE GREAT MOGUL'S DIAMOND 339
|
||
|
|
||
|
Tavernier
saw Aurangzeb's jewels, and that the latter obtained possession of it
when Shähjahän died, and so ultimately it passed to Persia with other
jewels taken by Nadir Shah.1
Taverniere
statements, in so far as they relate to this history, are—I. That the
Great Mogul's diamond was found in the mine at Kollür, when, we cannot
say, though Murray, Streeter, and other writers have ventured to assign
precise dates. II. It was acquired by Mir Jumla, and presented by him
to Shähjahän about the year 1656. III. It originally weighed 900 ratis
or 787£ carats ; but having been placed in the hands of Hortensio
Borgio, it was so much reduced by grinding, distinctly not by cleavage,
that, when seen by Tavernier in 1663, he personally ascertained that it
only weighed 319-1/2 ratis or 279-9/16 carats. IV. The figure given by
Tavernier, though very rudely drawn, is of a stone which must have
weighed more than 279^ carats (Florentine), - and it corresponds fairly
with his description. V. This description mentions a steepness on one
side and certain flaws, &c.
In
order to identify the Mogul's diamond with Bâbur's, certain
authorities, notably Professor Maskelyne, have suggested that
Tavernier's description did not really apply to the diamond presented
by Mir Jumla to Shähjahän ; that the stone he describes had therefore
not been found at Kollür ; that he was mistaken as to the particular
kind of ratis which he mentions, and that consequently his equivalent
in carats— calculated on the supposition that they were pearl ratis—was
incorrect ; finally, Professor Maskelyne maintains that Tavernier's
drawing of the stone differs from his description of it, and was wholly
incorrect and exaggerated in size.
Thus,
in order to establish this supposed link of the chain, we are invited
to whittle down Tavernier's account until it amounts to a bare
statement that he saw a large diamond, about which all that he records
as to its weight and history is incorrect.
If
I were not prepared to maintain that a jeweller of Tavernier's large
experience could not possibly have made the mistakes which have thus
been suggested, I should feel that I had rendered a very ill service in
editing these volumes. It is incredible that having actually handled
and weighed the stone, at his leisure, he could have made so great a
mistake as to believe that it weighed 279T%, or in round numbers 280 carats (Florentine), while it was really one of only 186 carats (English).
The custom, which has been followed by many writers, of adopting or rejecting Tavernier's statements according
» See vol. i. 275. ζ 2
|
||
|
|
||