Home › The Great Table › The Great Table

The Great Table

Tavernier's account of the "Table" Diamond--Its Size. Shape, and Value--Shah Jehan's Invasion of the Deccan--Fire and Sword--Raising Money to pay Tribute to the Victor--The Parsees and the English--Where is the Great Gem to-day? IN Tavernier's list of the "largest and finest diamonds and rubies seen by him in Europe and Asia," this stone occupies the third place, (II. 305). Of it he remarks: "It is a stone which weighs 176 1/8 mangelins, which make 242 5/16 of our carats. The mangelin, as I have said, is the weight used in the kingdoms of Golconda and Visapur, and it is equivalent to 1 3/8 of our carats. When in Golconda, in the year 1642, I was shown this stone, and it is the largest diamond I have seen in India in the hands of dealers. The owner allowed me to make a casting of it, which I sent to Surat to two of my friends, calling their attention to the beauty of the stone and to its price, which was 500,000 rupees or 750,000 livres of our money. I received a commission from them, in case it was pure and fine water, to offer 400,000 rupees for it. But it was impossible to come to terms at this price, although I believe that it might have been had if they were willing to offer 450,000." This is all that Tavernier tells us of this remarkable stone, which is illustrated in the first, though not in subsequent editions of his work. The representation shows it to be table-cut, so that it may be easily recognized, should it again come to light in India or elsewhere; for since the time of Tavernier it has not been seen by any European expert. Its peculiar form would easily allow of its being reduced by cleavage to two or more stones, a fate that has possibly befallen it. Many stones have from time to time been so treated, for the express purpose of destroying their identity, even though their intrinsic value has thereby been greatly reduced. A notable instance is the French "Blue Drop," which was of such an unique character, that after it was stolen from the Garde Meuble, in 1792, it could not be exposed for sale without incurring the risk of instant detection. Hence the necessity of altering its appearance by some process of reduction, as fully explained in our account of the "Hope Blue." In the same way the great "Table," also a stone of an unique type, at least as regarded its size and peculiar shape, was very likely broken up by cleavage into two or more stones, and it is by no means impossible that the Russian "Table," which will be described in a later chapter, may be one of those fragments. Pictures and other rare artistic objects are known to have been manipulated in analogous ways for like purposes. One of the numerous and vexatious charges brought by his enemies against Benvenuto Cellini, when employed at the court of Francis I., seems to have been of this character. The method which he adopted for bringing the wearisome and ruinous suits against him to a close, was highly characteristic. He tells us in his famous autobiography, that being unable to obtain any redress from the law, "I had recourse to a long sword, which I had by me. The first that I attacked was that person who commenced that unjust and irritating suit; and one evening I so hacked him about the legs and arms, taking care, however, not to kill him right out, that I deprived him of the use of both his legs." Having got rid of another party to the suit, in a similar summary manner, he exclaims, with grim humour, "For this and every other blessing, I returned thanks to the Supreme Being!"