THE GREAT MOGUL'S DIAMOND 343
Koh-i-Nur
when it came to Europe, of none of the other theories can the same be
said; but, on the contrary, to suit their respective exigencies, they
require the total rejection of one or more of the carefully recorded
observations on the condition of the Mogul's stone when placed in the
hands of this experienced jeweller for examination.1
The
necessary conclusion is that it is not the Mogul's diamond which,
through failure of being historically traced, as some authors assert,
has disappeared, but it is Babur's diamond of the history of which we
are really left in doubt. The fixing of the weight of Babur's diamond
at a figure identical, or nearly so, with that of the Koh-i-Nur when
brought to England, though used as a link in the chain, has, as I think
I have shown, effectively disposed of its claim to be identified with
the Mogul's diamond in the first place, and secondly with the Koh-i-Nur.
It has already been intimated that the Darya-i-Nur, a flat stone which weighs 186 carats, and is now in the Shah's treasury,2
may very possibly be Babur's diamond, with regard to which I can only
say that I have in vain sought for any well authenticated fact which in
the slightest degree controverts or even throws doubt upon that
suggestion.
2. Summary History of the Koh-i-Nur.
This
diamond, as related by Tavernier, was obtained in the mine of Kollur on
the Kistna (see vol. ii, 58). The precise date of its discovery is mere
matter of conjecture ; but about the year 1656 or 1657 it was
presented, while still uncut, to Shahjahan by Mir Jumla, who had
previously farmed the mines at Kollur and elsewhere. The stone then
weighed 900 ratis or 787 1/2 carats (these, if Florentine carats, were
equal to about 756 English carats).
In
the year 1665 this diamond was seen by Tavernier in Aurangzeb's
treasury, and it then weighed, as ascertained by himself, only 319 1/2
ratis, or 279 9/16 carats (which, if Florentine carats, equalled 268
19/50 English carats). It had been reduced to this size by the wasteful
grinding treatment to "which it had been subjected by a Venetian named
Hortensio Borgio.
In the year 1739 it was taken from Aurangzeb's feeble descendant, Muhammad Shah, by Nadir Shah, when he
1
Among other difficulties introduced into the subject are such as follow
from misquotation. Thus Kluge says that Tavernier himself described the
stone as weighing 319 1/2 ratis = 186 carats 1 For this unfortunate and
mischievous error there can be no excuse, as he goes on to say quite
correctly that the earlier weight was 793 5/3 carats. Handbuch der Edelsteinkunde, Leipzig, 1860, p. 341.
2 See Benjamin, Persia, p. 74.
