Home › The Great Mogul › The Great Mogul: Kluge

The Great Mogul: Kluge

In any case all these measurements differ enormously from that of Baber's gem, which everybody identifies with the Koh-i-Nur, and which Baber himself tells us weighed only "eight mishkels," or about 186 or 187 carats. Yet Kluge, with others, argues for the identity of both stones, on the ground that they were represented as about the same size, and that consequently it was highly improbable that there were two diamonds in the Delhi treasury, each of which weighed about 186 carats. But in order to create this difficulty, Kluge represents Tavernier as reducing his 319 1/2 ratis to 186 carats, whereas in point of fact he reduces them to 279 9/16, or in round numbers to 280 carats. And lest there should be any doubt at all about it, he writes the numbers out in full, thus: "Il pese trois cent dix-neuf ratis et demi, qui font deux cent quatre-vingts de nos carats." Why, then, except to fabricate an argument, does Kluge write: "He (Tavernier) describes it as a rosette, in the form of an egg cut in half, and weighing 319 1/1 ratis = 186 carats." It is not that Tavernier employs one and Kluge another kind of rati; but in order to get at the required 186 carats of the Koh-i-Nur, Kluge suppresses Tavernier's rati (7/8 to the carat), together with their equivalent of 280 carats, and substitutes his own figures, without informing the reader of the liberty he is taking with the text of the original. And thus vanishes the manipulated difficulty based on the assumed simultaneous presence of two such diamonds of the same unusual size amongst the Great Mogul's crown jewels. The history of these historical gems is in any case often involved in so much obscurity that the gratuitous invention of needless difficulties might well be dispensed with.

It is also asserted by Maskelyne that Tavernier's description of the Great Mogul does not correspond with its accompanying illustration, which would seem to answer tolerably well to the form of the Koh-i-Nur before it was re-cut in London. But there must surely be some strange mistake here. The fact that the proper illustrations do not accompany the text in subsequent editions of Tavernier's work may no doubt have caused some mystification. But there can be no possible mistake about the figure of the Great Mogul as given in the first edition of 1776, which answers exactly to the words, "rose-cut, round, and very high on one side." If this description be compared with the models both of the Koh-i-Nur and of the Great Mogul itself in our possession, all doubts will be at once removed as to the essentially different character of the two crystals The above quoted passages from Bernier and Tavernier really embody all the authentic information extant regarding the Great Mogul. Such as it is, it amply sufficies to show that this stone is not the Koh-i-Nur. The two differ absolutely in their origin, history, size, and form. Thus, while the Great Mogul is traced directly to the Coulour mine, the Koh-i-Nur has a legendary history dating back to the remotest times. The former, when found, weighed at least 787 carats, which was reduced by cutting to 280 carats, whereas the latter when it passed into the hands of Baber was only about 187 carats. One was round-shaped, rose-cut, of the purest water, with but one little crack and flaw; the other was an irregular ellipse, very flat, dull and full of flaws. Shah Jehan virtually ceased to reign from about 1657 till his death in 1666. But Aurung-zeb allowed him to retain possession of the greater part of his jewellery throughout his imprisonment in Agra. Tavernier tells us that a few days before his coronation the usurper begged his father to lend him some of these treasures for the occasion. At this request, which he took for an insult, and which, under the circumstances, was certainly somewhat cool, Shah Jehan fell into a paroxysm of rage which nearly brought him to his end. "In the excess of his anger he asked several times for a mortar and pestle, saying that he wanted to pound all his gems and pearls, so that Aurung-zeb might never have any of them. But his eldest daughter Begum Saheb, who never forsook him, throwing herself at his feet, prevented him from coming to this extremity and ... appeased Shah Jehan more in order to preserve the jewels for herself than to please her brother." It has accordingly been asked how the Great Mogul came into Aurung-zeb's hands before his father's death; for we have seen that he exhibited it to Tavernier in November, 1665. But Tavernier nowhere says that Shah Jehan retained all his gems, and he even adds that although when mounting the throne Aurung-zeb had only one jewel in his diadem, had he wished to have others placed in it, there was no lack of them. . . . . having asked his father for his gems only for the purpose of never returning them to him. Besides there was a good reason why the Great Mogul should have fallen into Aurung-zeb's hands at the time of his father's imprisonment. It was presented by Emir Jemla to Shah Jehan certainly not earlier than 1655, or about two years before his deposition, and during those two years it was probably in the hands of Borgio, for by the old processes such a large diamond would take fully that time, if not longer, to cut. "Thus," continues King, from whom we are quoting, "almost immediately upon the great stone being put into Borgio's hands, its rightful owner had lost all control over it. In fact had he been able or permitted to superintend the operation, there can be no doubt his experience and taste in such matters would have brought about a widely different result."

The subsequent history of the Great Mogul from the time it was seen by Tavernier in 1665, remains a blank. Henceforth no distinct reference anywhere occurs to it, and although we may presume that it continued in the possession of Aurung-zeb's successors down to the sack of Delhi by Nadir Shah, we have no knowledge of what became of it on that memorable occasion. The authorities are almost unanimous in assuming that the big stone carried off by the Persian invader, under circumstances to be described further on, was the Koh-i-Nur. But amongst the spoils may of course have also been the Great Mogul, though no distinct mention is made of the fact. Hence some have thought that it is now amongst the treasures of the Shah of Persia under the name of "Darya-i-Nur," or "Sea of Light." But it will be seen further on that the Darya-i-Nur is certainly a different stone.

Others arguing from its form have suggested that it may be the Russian Orloff, an equally untenable theory, as will be made evident when we come to deal with that famous gem.

Our own opinion is that the Great Mogul has ceased to exist as such. It was probably stolen either at the sack of Delhi or at the death of Nadir Shah, and then in order to escape detection its possessors had it broken by cleavage into two or more stones. Its form and especially its great size would facilitate this process, a fate which we know has overtaken more than one other large diamond." In confirmation of this view, the reader is more particularly referred to the statements of Dr. Beke, Mr. Tennant, and Sir David Brewster regarding the Abbas Mirza diamond.

Barbot states that it was of a very pure water, though of a soft rosy tint, and that it has been estimated at pound 420,000, while others have suspected that it was not a diamond at all, but a white sapphire or perhaps topaz. But Tavernier was far too good an expert to be mistaken in a matter of this sort, and the suggestion would probably never have been made but for its altogether exceptional size.