History of the Darya-i-Nur Diamond

DARYA-I-NUR.

A City of Gems and Jewels--Nadir Shah's Descent on Delhi--Indiscriminate Slaughter and Plunder--The Shah of Persia's Largest Diamond, "Sea of Light"--Its Shape and Character--Is the "Darya-i-Nur" the Missing "Mogul?"--"Opinions Differ"--A Reliable Judgment.

Mohammed Shah, who inherited the spoils extorted by his progenitors from the unhappy kings of Golconda and Beejapoor, sat upon the throne of Delhi, a mark for any adventurous warrior who had the courage to descend the Suleiman range, and, crossing the Indus, march straight to the most luxurious capital of the Eastern empire. Jewels of unequalled magnitude and lustre were openly exposed in durbars of the Palace, on the holy shrines, and in the princely demesnes of its Maharajah, its nobles and its merchants. Nothing in the history of modern times can equal the inroad of the humbly-born sheep-skin clothier, Nadir Shah, who had mounted the throne of Persia. Without warning, this warrior-prince came boldly on the devoted city, and having plundered its palaces, laid waste its populous streets, which he choked up with the dead of his opponents. He removed his booty with reckless prodigality, amidst the fire and smoke of the devastated public buildings. Nothing of value escaped the rapine of this merciless murderer. The peacock throne with its priceless jewels, the treasures of the general populace, even the ordinary stores of the labourer went in the indiscriminate loot. The "Koh-i-Nur" (as previously shown), and the "Darya-i-Nur," with waggon-loads of less renowned, but hardly less valuable things, were removed en masse to Khorassan, where the murderer arrayed himself in the spoils of his royal victim, and unconsciously by his very triumph, paved the way to his own murder, and the destruction of his dynasty and race.

"The Darya-i-Nur," which in imagination might seem to flash blood red rays, came out of this carnage, pure and lovely as when it was first cut. It is probably the finest gem, as it certainly is the largest diamond belonging to the Shah of Persia. It is a magnificent stone of the purest water, and of almost matchless lustre, fully deserving the proud title of "Sea or River of Light," by which it has always been known in Persia. It appears to be rose-cut, and weights 186 carats, which, strange to say, was the exact weight of the "Koh-i-Nur," before that famous gem was re-cut in London. Were there any truth in the story that the emperor Aurung-zeb had the "Koh-i-Nur," and another stone of like size, set in the eyes of the peacock overshadowing his throne, we might well suppose that this was the corresponding gem. In any case, it seems tolerably certain that the "Darya-i-Nur" was one of the diamonds carried off by Nadir Shah, when he plundered the Delhi treasury in 1739. But if it was never associated with the "Koh-i-Nur," it is now at least fittingly coupled with the "Taj-e-Mah," a gem of scarcely inferior splendour, for both of these superb diamonds figure as the ornaments in a pair of magnificent bracelets, which Sir John Malcolm tells us he saw in Persia, and which were valued at no less than one million sterling.

Some writers have suggested that the "Darya-i-Nur" may possibly be the missing "Great Mogul," of which nothing has been heard since the time it was seen by Tavernier in Aurung-zeb's treasury in 1665. Thus Barbot, amongst others, writes that, "Thamask Kouli-Khan, so famous under the name of Nadir Shah, seems to have got possession of the 'Great Mogul.' If so it may now be in Persia, where it is known by the name of 'Darya-i-Nur,' or 'Ocean of Light.'"

But while it is quite possible, and even probable that Nadir may have seized the "Great Mogul," it does not at all follow that this diamond is now represented by the "Darya-i-Nur." On the contrary, the two stones differ so widely in size and form that they cannot possibly be the same jewel under two different names. The "Great Mogul," as we have seen, was reduced in Borgio's hands to 279 9/16 carats, whereas Malcolm tells us that the "Darya-i-Nur" weighs only 186 carats. In shape the former presented the appearance of an egg cut in half, whereas the latter appears to be rather of a flat oval form. It is also mounted in a bracelet, a setting for which the "Great Mogul" would be unsuited. Hence, whatever its origin, the "Darya-i-Nur" cannot at all events be identified with the great Indian diamond.