Home › The Great Table › The Great Table: Tavernier

The Great Table: Tavernier

At the period referred to by Tavernier, Golconda was in a deplorable condition. Shah Jehan, whose miserable end (hardly less wretched than that of Shakespeare's King Lear), has generally excited so much commiseration, that his infamous treachery and indescribable inhumanity, are lost sight of, had, only three years before Tavernier's visit, collected an immense force to invade the Deccan. Every country that was overrun by his troops was delivered to fire and sword. "One hundred and fifteen towns and castles were taken in the course of the year, and the kings of Beejapoor and Golconda, to appease the conqueror, renounced their rank as sovereign princes, and received commissions from the emperor of the Moguls." This was but the beginning of sorrow. It was between this eclipse and the subsequent utter destruction of these renowned kingdoms, under Mir Jemla, and Aurungzeb's eldest son, Mohammed, that Tavernier saw the royal gem under notice, in the hands of a private diamond merchant. How came this stone in private hands? The answer is not far to seek. The tribute, on the first signing of the treaty, was up to the full amount. Mir Jemla had probably suggested this, as a severe lesson, with a view to bring his royal master to his knees; but the fallen king had gall enough to seize the person of the revolted minister's son, and the war between Katb and Mir Jemla was a war a outrance. The annually recurring tribute forced the court and king to raise money on jewels not disclosed to the Mogul conqueror, and as Tavernier was known certainly to the Parsee merchants of India, and had in a measure gained the confidence of the most English of all Asiatics, it is not surprising that, European as he was, he should be shewn, and even allowed to take a model of this stone. We venture to doubt whether Tavernier could have secured it for an added pound 5,000 to the offer he made, with a view to purchase, considering the wealth and stable character of the opulent merchants in Western India. It was said that a Turvee or Bheel chief carried it to the city of Golconda, and commenced his negociations by an interview with a "Havildar," a commander of horse, a native of his own tribe. This is probably true. The Bheels dwelt, and still dwell, in the fastnesses of the Western Ghauts, and along the affluents of the Upper Godavery, where most probably the stone was found.

As already stated, it is probable that this stone has been broken up, in order to baffle all efforts to trace its identity, though some Orientals differ from this explanation of its disappearance. It is estimated that there are more than 120,000 families of Parsees residing within the limits of what was termed, in the first quarter of this century, the "Presidency of Bombay," and in that capital alone there were 6,000 families. No other class of natives has connected itself so intimately with the English. The fire which blazed in the burning bush, but consumed it not, is still the emblem of the Supreme Being they worship. They learn English and speak it idiomatically. They master also the Gujerati tongue, which prevails about the Gulfs of Cutch and Cambay, and a large tract of the western coast; and, although their religion indisposes them to become working jewellers, they value, as Europeans do, beautiful things in nature and art. That the Parsees would resist the outrageous bartering tricks of the native, is characteristic, but that a magnificent gem in their possession would be broken up is questioned. Then where is the great "Table" diamond? Certainly not advertised, if in Persia, nor paraded, if in Bombay, Gujerat, or Beejapoor.