been
in possession of- the jewel of his ill-starred ancestor for six years
before this date. It is therefore a logical deduction from Clusius's
statement that the weight of the Burgundian Diamond was far below that
of Affetati's ; and consequently that it did not so much as approach to
the 54 carats of the actual Sancy.
Now
to attempt to discover the origin of this traditionary confusion
between Charles the Bold's Diamond and the Sancy. Nicolas Harlai,
Seigneur de Sancy, was the early friend and in after life treasurer to
Henri IV. He changed his religion at the same time with his master and
acted as his envoy at several courts, Queen Elizabeth's amongst the
rest. In the year 1589 he obtained a certain large Diamond (not farther
described) from Dom Antonio, the prétendant to the Crown of Portugal,
as security for a loan of 100,000 livres, which was never discharged.
Now the tellers of the story take upon themselves to assume a step here, and
make out this stone to be the ancient Burgundian, which, as we have
seen, was then in the possession of Dom Antonio's mortal enemy Philip
II. : this change of ownership therefore was not one very likely to
have taken place. Harlai being at Soleure, his king and friend wishing
in his turn to raise some money upon this valuable pawn in order to
hire a body of Swiss, the Diamond was sent to him in the hands of a
trusty servant of Harlai's. But he, as the Btory goes, being beset by
robbers upon the road, had only just time to swallow the Diamond before
he was murdered and stripped by them. His master, learning his fate,
had the happy idea to count upon this last expedient of the despair of
his faithful envoy, and therefore disinterred his corpse, opened it,
and was not disappointed in his expectation of recovering his treasure
out of this unsuspected hiding-place. But his enjoyment of it was
brief, for carrying out his first intention, he
