Сontents
I n m e m o r y o f M u n n u K a s l i wa l
Elena Gagarina
India and Europe: Interconnections in Jewelry Traditions
10 Foreword
9 Foreword
Alex Popov
229
Jewelry: India and the Western Imagination, 1550–2000 Diana Scarisbrick
242
India of the Maharajas and the French Art of Jewelry,
Vladimir Dmitriev
Larisa Peshekhonova
11 Foreword
European Influences on Jewelry in India
12 Acknowledgments
Indian Influences on Jewelry in Europe
11 Foreword
Feodor Andreev
15
26
31
Introduction
Usha R. Balakrishnan Key to the Catalogue
South India
South Indian Jewelry Traditions
Usha R. Balakrishnan 42
105
Catalogue nos. 1–43
Mughal Empire
The Mughals: Conquerors, Emperors, Connoisseurs
Usha R. Balakrishnan 120
Catalogue nos. 44–102
1910s-1930s
257
Catalogue nos. 128–155
Cartier 283
Catalogue nos. 156–195
Chaumet
315
Catalogue nos. 196–211
Lacloche Frères
327
Catalogue no. 212
Mauboussin
Mellerio
Van Cleef & Arpels
328
Catalogue nos. 213–215
332
Catalogue no. 216
334
Catalogue nos. 217–241
Precious Stones in Indian Jewelry
Usha R. Balakrishnan
Usha R. Balakrishnan
187
Maharatnani: The Five Great Gems
192
207
Catalogue nos. 103–112
The Princely State of Hyderabad in the Deccan Jewels of Hyderabad
Usha R. Balakrishnan 207
Catalogue nos. 113–127
353
The Great Jewelers of Modern India
The Gem Palace: The Genius of Munnu Kasliwal
358
Catalogue nos. 242–276
392
Bhagat: Perfection in Creation
397
Usha R. Balakrishnan
Catalogue nos. 277–300
Appendix 415
Methods of Gem Cutting and Gem Setting:
Olga Vecherina
419
Glossary
425
Index of Place Names
422 426
A Synthesis of Inspiration, Calculation, and Skill
Bibliography
Index of Personal Names
Сontents
I n m e m o r y o f M u n n u K a s l i wa l
Elena Gagarina
India and Europe: Interconnections in Jewelry Traditions
10 Foreword
9 Foreword
Alex Popov
229
Jewelry: India and the Western Imagination, 1550–2000 Diana Scarisbrick
242
India of the Maharajas and the French Art of Jewelry,
Vladimir Dmitriev
Larisa Peshekhonova
11 Foreword
European Influences on Jewelry in India
12 Acknowledgments
Indian Influences on Jewelry in Europe
11 Foreword
Feodor Andreev
15
26
31
Introduction
Usha R. Balakrishnan Key to the Catalogue
South India
South Indian Jewelry Traditions
Usha R. Balakrishnan 42
105
Catalogue nos. 1–43
Mughal Empire
The Mughals: Conquerors, Emperors, Connoisseurs
Usha R. Balakrishnan 120
Catalogue nos. 44–102
1910s-1930s
257
Catalogue nos. 128–155
Cartier 283
Catalogue nos. 156–195
Chaumet
315
Catalogue nos. 196–211
Lacloche Frères
327
Catalogue no. 212
Mauboussin
Mellerio
Van Cleef & Arpels
328
Catalogue nos. 213–215
332
Catalogue no. 216
334
Catalogue nos. 217–241
Precious Stones in Indian Jewelry
Usha R. Balakrishnan
Usha R. Balakrishnan
187
Maharatnani: The Five Great Gems
192
207
Catalogue nos. 103–112
The Princely State of Hyderabad in the Deccan Jewels of Hyderabad
Usha R. Balakrishnan 207
Catalogue nos. 113–127
353
The Great Jewelers of Modern India
The Gem Palace: The Genius of Munnu Kasliwal
358
Catalogue nos. 242–276
392
Bhagat: Perfection in Creation
397
Usha R. Balakrishnan
Catalogue nos. 277–300
Appendix 415
Methods of Gem Cutting and Gem Setting:
Olga Vecherina
419
Glossary
425
Index of Place Names
422 426
A Synthesis of Inspiration, Calculation, and Skill
Bibliography
Index of Personal Names
After the Persian invader Nadir Shah plundered the
Mughal treasury in 1739, he carted off vast quantities of
gold, gems, jewelry, and thrones to Iran. Choice gifts from the pillage, comprising magnificent jewels set with
precious gems and gem-encrusted objects, were sent as
a miniature of Tsar Alexander I in a gold-and-enamel
pepper, cardamom, cotton, diamonds, beryls, rubies,
of the Russian Federation.
India became the preeminent gem-trading center of the
bracelet. This jewel is also part of the Diamond Fund
and pearls. Because of its vast storehouse of diamonds, ancient world.
Spanning a legacy of 5,000 years, the jewelry of India
part of Nadir Shah’s embassy to the Russian empire in 1741
The Indian subcontinent is a vast landmass covering an
provides striking evidence of the country’s rich cultural
Russia). These gifts, a tiny part of the former wealth of
million square miles). The majestic Himalayas stand guard
jewelry. For women, jewels went far beyond adornment.
and presented to Empress Elizaveta Petrovna (Elizabeth of
Mughal India, are kept in the Treasure Gallery of the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg.
The magnificent rose-cut Orlov diamond, weighing
189.62 carats and mounted in the Russian Imperial
scepter, originated in the legendary Golconda mines of
India. The gem journeyed from the Deccan to Russia after being stolen by a French soldier from an ancient Indian
temple and was acquired for 400,000 florins by the court jeweler Ivan Lazarev in Amsterdam. Later the stone was bought by Count Grigoriy Orlov as a gift for Empress Catherine the Great.
Another magnificent Indian stone, the 88.70-carat,
irregularly shaped Shah diamond, also resides in the
Diamond Fund of the Russian Federation at the Kremlin in Moscow. The Golconda diamond in its original crystal form is believed to have once adorned the throne of the
area of approximately 3 million square kilometers (1.16
in the north and three vast bodies of water, the Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Bay of Bengal, surround the peninsula. But cocooned though India was by these
formidable natural barriers, according to some legends the Biblical king Solomon’s ships dropped anchor more than
one thousand years before the Common Era, acquiring gold as well as “almug trees and precious stones.”7 The Romans, Greeks, Arabs, Portuguese, Dutch, English, French, and sundry others all sailed into the ports of ancient India.
Mighty conquerors and meandering caravans journeyed over the Khyber Pass into the plains of India seeking
history. Women, men, children, and even the gods wore They constituted wealth and were important instruments of savings to be used in times of need. Jewels enhanced
fertility, protected against the maleficent influences of powerful planets, and served as talismans against the evil eye. They defined social status and identity, with
precious metals and gems distributed according to an established hierarchy: gold and diamonds for the
wealthy, silver in rural communities, and base metals for the poor. Nonetheless, no one, irrespective of class
or status, was devoid of ornaments. From a simple pair of ear studs, to circlets of metal on both wrists, black
beads around the neck, or tinkling bells on the ankles— jewels were always worn. Even today, despite shifts in
social values, jewelry remains the essential medium for
demonstrating social position. Among the sixteen rituals of beautification (solah shringar) prescribed for a woman
Mughal emperors. It bears the names and dates of three
in ancient Indian texts, ten pertain to adornment with
of Ahmadnagar in the Deccan), 1591; Shah Jahan (the
embellishment with hair ornaments, nose rings, earrings,
rulers inscribed on its facets: Burhan Nizam Shah II (ruler Mughal emperor), 1641; and Fath-‘Ali Shah Qajar (ruler of Persia), 1824. In 1829 the diamond was brought to
Nikolas I by Prince Khosrow Mirza, a grandson of Fath-‘Ali
jewels. Besides the ritual bath, cosmetics, and clothes,
necklace, armlets, bangles, rings, waistband, anklets, and toe rings is mandated.
Men in India likewise wore magnificent jewels. They
Shah to “atone” for the murder of Alexander S. Griboyedov,
pierced their earlobes and wore amulets, armbands,
in Tehran.
Mughals and the maharajas of India, the best gems and
the head of the Russian diplomatic mission to Persia, Until recently, with the appearance of the Mughal
diamond necklace (cat. no. 103), the largest colorless, pure, and transparent flat “portrait diamond” from
India weighing 27.02 carats was the one that frames
bracelets, belts, and even anklets. In the court of the
the grandest jewels were prerogatives of men. Turban
jewels proclaimed royalty, divinity, and honor. Children
were also adorned with amulets around their waists and charms around their necks to ward off bad luck. Their
above The Shah diamond. India, seventeenth century. The Diamond Fund of the Russian Federation, Moscow.
below Portrait of the Emperor Alexander I framed by a large “portrait” diamond
(detail of the bracelet), second quarter of the nineteenth century. The Diamond
Fund of the Russian Federation, Moscow. on p. 16 The Orlov diamond; detail of the
scepter of Empress Catherine the Great.
Russia, 1784; diamond: India, seventeenth century. The Diamond Fund of the Russian Federation, Moscow.
Introduction
17
After the Persian invader Nadir Shah plundered the
Mughal treasury in 1739, he carted off vast quantities of
gold, gems, jewelry, and thrones to Iran. Choice gifts from the pillage, comprising magnificent jewels set with
precious gems and gem-encrusted objects, were sent as
a miniature of Tsar Alexander I in a gold-and-enamel
pepper, cardamom, cotton, diamonds, beryls, rubies,
of the Russian Federation.
India became the preeminent gem-trading center of the
bracelet. This jewel is also part of the Diamond Fund
and pearls. Because of its vast storehouse of diamonds, ancient world.
Spanning a legacy of 5,000 years, the jewelry of India
part of Nadir Shah’s embassy to the Russian empire in 1741
The Indian subcontinent is a vast landmass covering an
provides striking evidence of the country’s rich cultural
Russia). These gifts, a tiny part of the former wealth of
million square miles). The majestic Himalayas stand guard
jewelry. For women, jewels went far beyond adornment.
and presented to Empress Elizaveta Petrovna (Elizabeth of
Mughal India, are kept in the Treasure Gallery of the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg.
The magnificent rose-cut Orlov diamond, weighing
189.62 carats and mounted in the Russian Imperial
scepter, originated in the legendary Golconda mines of
India. The gem journeyed from the Deccan to Russia after being stolen by a French soldier from an ancient Indian
temple and was acquired for 400,000 florins by the court jeweler Ivan Lazarev in Amsterdam. Later the stone was bought by Count Grigoriy Orlov as a gift for Empress Catherine the Great.
Another magnificent Indian stone, the 88.70-carat,
irregularly shaped Shah diamond, also resides in the
Diamond Fund of the Russian Federation at the Kremlin in Moscow. The Golconda diamond in its original crystal form is believed to have once adorned the throne of the
area of approximately 3 million square kilometers (1.16
in the north and three vast bodies of water, the Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Bay of Bengal, surround the peninsula. But cocooned though India was by these
formidable natural barriers, according to some legends the Biblical king Solomon’s ships dropped anchor more than
one thousand years before the Common Era, acquiring gold as well as “almug trees and precious stones.”7 The Romans, Greeks, Arabs, Portuguese, Dutch, English, French, and sundry others all sailed into the ports of ancient India.
Mighty conquerors and meandering caravans journeyed over the Khyber Pass into the plains of India seeking
history. Women, men, children, and even the gods wore They constituted wealth and were important instruments of savings to be used in times of need. Jewels enhanced
fertility, protected against the maleficent influences of powerful planets, and served as talismans against the evil eye. They defined social status and identity, with
precious metals and gems distributed according to an established hierarchy: gold and diamonds for the
wealthy, silver in rural communities, and base metals for the poor. Nonetheless, no one, irrespective of class
or status, was devoid of ornaments. From a simple pair of ear studs, to circlets of metal on both wrists, black
beads around the neck, or tinkling bells on the ankles— jewels were always worn. Even today, despite shifts in
social values, jewelry remains the essential medium for
demonstrating social position. Among the sixteen rituals of beautification (solah shringar) prescribed for a woman
Mughal emperors. It bears the names and dates of three
in ancient Indian texts, ten pertain to adornment with
of Ahmadnagar in the Deccan), 1591; Shah Jahan (the
embellishment with hair ornaments, nose rings, earrings,
rulers inscribed on its facets: Burhan Nizam Shah II (ruler Mughal emperor), 1641; and Fath-‘Ali Shah Qajar (ruler of Persia), 1824. In 1829 the diamond was brought to
Nikolas I by Prince Khosrow Mirza, a grandson of Fath-‘Ali
jewels. Besides the ritual bath, cosmetics, and clothes,
necklace, armlets, bangles, rings, waistband, anklets, and toe rings is mandated.
Men in India likewise wore magnificent jewels. They
Shah to “atone” for the murder of Alexander S. Griboyedov,
pierced their earlobes and wore amulets, armbands,
in Tehran.
Mughals and the maharajas of India, the best gems and
the head of the Russian diplomatic mission to Persia, Until recently, with the appearance of the Mughal
diamond necklace (cat. no. 103), the largest colorless, pure, and transparent flat “portrait diamond” from
India weighing 27.02 carats was the one that frames
bracelets, belts, and even anklets. In the court of the
the grandest jewels were prerogatives of men. Turban
jewels proclaimed royalty, divinity, and honor. Children
were also adorned with amulets around their waists and charms around their necks to ward off bad luck. Their
above The Shah diamond. India, seventeenth century. The Diamond Fund of the Russian Federation, Moscow.
below Portrait of the Emperor Alexander I framed by a large “portrait” diamond
(detail of the bracelet), second quarter of the nineteenth century. The Diamond
Fund of the Russian Federation, Moscow. on p. 16 The Orlov diamond; detail of the
scepter of Empress Catherine the Great.
Russia, 1784; diamond: India, seventeenth century. The Diamond Fund of the Russian Federation, Moscow.
Introduction
17
Design, fashion, craftsmanship skills, gemstone setting,
ways by the South Indian goldsmith. The five “great gems”
set with gemstones. Additionally, rubies, spinels, and
aesthetic sensibility of generations of patrons who
rubies and spinels from Burma, sapphires from Sri Lanka,
entire surface areas of objects and jewels (cat. no. 89).
and the lapidary arts are displayed in the context of the
or maharatnani—diamonds from the Golconda mines,
commissioned and adorned themselves with these jewels.
emeralds from Colombia, and pearls from the Persian
The exhibition explores the rich, distinctive, and
Gulf—were sold in the gem markets of South India and
unique heritage of Indian jewelry: the striking boldness
supplied ateliers all around the country. Nature in all its
of South Indian jewels, the delicate refinement of the
glory was a source of design inspiration. Beautiful flowers,
Mughal period, the flamboyant jewels of the maharajas, the cross-cultural influences between Europe and India the creations of contemporary designers whose jewels
in countless different ways.
ornaments are shown in the context of their inspiration,
From the Deccan, designs, techniques, and skills
the manner in which they were worn, and the period to
traveled north into the Mughal courts of Akbar, Jahangir,
which they belonged.
and Shah Jahan, where they coalesced with Mughal
The Roman elites of the first century CE, grown rich
artistic sensibilities to produce the quintessential Mughal-
as a result of successful military campaigns, developed
style jewelry, a unique combination of gold, gems, and
a craving for jewels. India was the only supplier of
enamel (cat. no. 71). The Mughals were powerful warriors,
gemstones at the time; therefore vast quantities of Roman
astute diplomats, and ambitious rulers. Yet they were also
gold coins poured into South India to pay for the purchase of precious gems, prompting Emperor Tiberius to appeal to
articles of female vanity, and in particular with that rage
forms conceived to recreate the beautiful flora of India:
poppy flowers, lilies, narcissuses, lotus, and marigolds
coins were strung into necklaces and shaped, beaten,
sparkle in gem-set glory.
chased, twisted, and engraved in unique ways by
There was no limitation on the manner in which
goldsmiths to form spectacular gold jewels.
gems were utilized by the Mughals. They were used in
The design and forms of South Indian jewelry are
architecture in the pietra-dura inlays in the Taj Mahal;
unique. Monochromatic gold predominates; sheet gold
they were set into thrones, inlaid in jades, encrusted into
was worked in repoussé to create three-dimensional
jugs, plates, and even footstools; large emeralds were
designs in relief and decorated with filigree and
carved in the form of cups and entire rubies transformed
granulation. Cabochon rubies and diamonds were
into rings; ornaments of infinite variety and forms were
embedded in closed settings and articulated in unique
magnificent turban ornaments, necklaces. armbands,
thumb rings, belts, and jeweled daggers, all set with large gemstones. Gems and jewels flaunted imperial might and material wealth. There is incredible precision and visual perfection in Mughal jewelry. Extraordinarily beautiful gemstones were enclosed in metal and held in place by ribbons of gold, while intricate gold work and delicate enamel colors decorated the surfaces.
With the waning of Mughal power, the nineteenth
magnificent splendor and ostentatious display that rivaled
the Mughal vision of paradise on earth, with designs and
money of the commonwealth to foreign nations?”8 The
power. They sat on gem-encrusted thrones and wore
beautiful architecture and miniature paintings, and above creation of spectacular jewels. Jewels became symbols of
of its wealth [gold] and sends in exchange for baubles the
emperors, jewels and gemstones proclaimed wealth and
century saw the emergence of the local courts of India
all in the obsessive acquisition of precious stones and the
for jewels and precious trinkets which drains the empire
seventeenth through the nineteenth centuries, constitutes
aesthetes and artists, and their vision of divine kingship
found expression in patronage of all the arts, especially in
the Roman Senate: “How are we to deal with the peculiar
The magnificence and beauty of Mughal jewels,
a zenith in India’s cultural history. To the Mughal
(cat. no .7) were all incorporated into jewelry designs
drawings, miniature paintings, and photographs, the
and pen boxes.
into stylized forms in necklaces; birds and peacocks elephants, lion-monsters, tiger claws, and snakes
craftsmanship. Juxtaposing the jewels with design
with gemstones to be transformed into cups, spoons,
manifest in the artistic achievements of jewelers of the
danced amid gardens of ruby-and-diamond flowers;
display the enduring beauty of Indian design and
Jades were carved into amulets and pendants and inlaid
symbols of fertility and the created world, took the form
of ear ornaments; jasmine-bud garlands were transformed
in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and
emeralds were specially cut, carved, and set into the
as political and cultural powerhouses. It was a period of
any European court of the time. These kingdoms scattered around India, almost six hundred of them in all, were
inordinately wealthy. Maharajas, rajas, nawabs, and the
nizam perceived themselves to be emperors and emulated the style of the Mughal courts. As they had been in the
Mughal period, jewels in the post-Mughal courts remained a quintessential element in court life and aristocratic
privilege. To the maharaja, personal adornment was not just a matter of tradition or personal taste but a
proclamation of rank, wealth, and power. Privilege was
proclaimed by blazing turban jewels, magnificent gems, and gem-studded accouterments. The Mughalization of India also resulted in a certain homogenization of the
above Detail of the necklace: gold clasp and pendant beads in the shape of jasmine
buds. Tamil Nadu, nineteenth century.
Musée Barbier-Mueller, Geneva (cat. no. 16). below Prince Khurram (later, Emperor
Shah Jahan) offering jewels to Jahangir. Painting. India, ca. 1600–10. The British Library, London.
Introduction
21
Design, fashion, craftsmanship skills, gemstone setting,
ways by the South Indian goldsmith. The five “great gems”
set with gemstones. Additionally, rubies, spinels, and
aesthetic sensibility of generations of patrons who
rubies and spinels from Burma, sapphires from Sri Lanka,
entire surface areas of objects and jewels (cat. no. 89).
and the lapidary arts are displayed in the context of the
or maharatnani—diamonds from the Golconda mines,
commissioned and adorned themselves with these jewels.
emeralds from Colombia, and pearls from the Persian
The exhibition explores the rich, distinctive, and
Gulf—were sold in the gem markets of South India and
unique heritage of Indian jewelry: the striking boldness
supplied ateliers all around the country. Nature in all its
of South Indian jewels, the delicate refinement of the
glory was a source of design inspiration. Beautiful flowers,
Mughal period, the flamboyant jewels of the maharajas, the cross-cultural influences between Europe and India the creations of contemporary designers whose jewels
in countless different ways.
ornaments are shown in the context of their inspiration,
From the Deccan, designs, techniques, and skills
the manner in which they were worn, and the period to
traveled north into the Mughal courts of Akbar, Jahangir,
which they belonged.
and Shah Jahan, where they coalesced with Mughal
The Roman elites of the first century CE, grown rich
artistic sensibilities to produce the quintessential Mughal-
as a result of successful military campaigns, developed
style jewelry, a unique combination of gold, gems, and
a craving for jewels. India was the only supplier of
enamel (cat. no. 71). The Mughals were powerful warriors,
gemstones at the time; therefore vast quantities of Roman
astute diplomats, and ambitious rulers. Yet they were also
gold coins poured into South India to pay for the purchase of precious gems, prompting Emperor Tiberius to appeal to
articles of female vanity, and in particular with that rage
forms conceived to recreate the beautiful flora of India:
poppy flowers, lilies, narcissuses, lotus, and marigolds
coins were strung into necklaces and shaped, beaten,
sparkle in gem-set glory.
chased, twisted, and engraved in unique ways by
There was no limitation on the manner in which
goldsmiths to form spectacular gold jewels.
gems were utilized by the Mughals. They were used in
The design and forms of South Indian jewelry are
architecture in the pietra-dura inlays in the Taj Mahal;
unique. Monochromatic gold predominates; sheet gold
they were set into thrones, inlaid in jades, encrusted into
was worked in repoussé to create three-dimensional
jugs, plates, and even footstools; large emeralds were
designs in relief and decorated with filigree and
carved in the form of cups and entire rubies transformed
granulation. Cabochon rubies and diamonds were
into rings; ornaments of infinite variety and forms were
embedded in closed settings and articulated in unique
magnificent turban ornaments, necklaces. armbands,
thumb rings, belts, and jeweled daggers, all set with large gemstones. Gems and jewels flaunted imperial might and material wealth. There is incredible precision and visual perfection in Mughal jewelry. Extraordinarily beautiful gemstones were enclosed in metal and held in place by ribbons of gold, while intricate gold work and delicate enamel colors decorated the surfaces.
With the waning of Mughal power, the nineteenth
magnificent splendor and ostentatious display that rivaled
the Mughal vision of paradise on earth, with designs and
money of the commonwealth to foreign nations?”8 The
power. They sat on gem-encrusted thrones and wore
beautiful architecture and miniature paintings, and above creation of spectacular jewels. Jewels became symbols of
of its wealth [gold] and sends in exchange for baubles the
emperors, jewels and gemstones proclaimed wealth and
century saw the emergence of the local courts of India
all in the obsessive acquisition of precious stones and the
for jewels and precious trinkets which drains the empire
seventeenth through the nineteenth centuries, constitutes
aesthetes and artists, and their vision of divine kingship
found expression in patronage of all the arts, especially in
the Roman Senate: “How are we to deal with the peculiar
The magnificence and beauty of Mughal jewels,
a zenith in India’s cultural history. To the Mughal
(cat. no .7) were all incorporated into jewelry designs
drawings, miniature paintings, and photographs, the
and pen boxes.
into stylized forms in necklaces; birds and peacocks elephants, lion-monsters, tiger claws, and snakes
craftsmanship. Juxtaposing the jewels with design
with gemstones to be transformed into cups, spoons,
manifest in the artistic achievements of jewelers of the
danced amid gardens of ruby-and-diamond flowers;
display the enduring beauty of Indian design and
Jades were carved into amulets and pendants and inlaid
symbols of fertility and the created world, took the form
of ear ornaments; jasmine-bud garlands were transformed
in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and
emeralds were specially cut, carved, and set into the
as political and cultural powerhouses. It was a period of
any European court of the time. These kingdoms scattered around India, almost six hundred of them in all, were
inordinately wealthy. Maharajas, rajas, nawabs, and the
nizam perceived themselves to be emperors and emulated the style of the Mughal courts. As they had been in the
Mughal period, jewels in the post-Mughal courts remained a quintessential element in court life and aristocratic
privilege. To the maharaja, personal adornment was not just a matter of tradition or personal taste but a
proclamation of rank, wealth, and power. Privilege was
proclaimed by blazing turban jewels, magnificent gems, and gem-studded accouterments. The Mughalization of India also resulted in a certain homogenization of the
above Detail of the necklace: gold clasp and pendant beads in the shape of jasmine
buds. Tamil Nadu, nineteenth century.
Musée Barbier-Mueller, Geneva (cat. no. 16). below Prince Khurram (later, Emperor
Shah Jahan) offering jewels to Jahangir. Painting. India, ca. 1600–10. The British Library, London.
Introduction
21
the golden hilt of a seventeenth-century sword from the
plundered and dispersed. Nadir Shah distributed gems
poppy-blossom brooch (cat. no. 294). Bhagat jewels are
from India to Persia. Historical jewels have vanished,
Deccan (cat. no. 127) serves as inspiration for a sapphire formal, yet they manifest a grace and delicacy that balances exuberance and restraint.
In the five-hundred-year span that the exhibition
covers, vast quantities of jewelry were fabricated in
thousands of workshops—in palace ateliers and towns around the country, but also in the more than six
and jewels from the Mughal treasury all along his route gems have been recut and faceted in new ways, and
family heirlooms have metamorphosed into new forms in keeping with modern fashions: turban jewels have been converted into necklaces, armbands into bracelets, and amulets into pendants.
In recent years, the beauty, technical perfection, and
hundred thousand villages in India, each one with at
allure of old Indian gemstones have excited both private
old Indian jewelry that has survived is minuscule. In
of India that have survived are much coveted by
least one sonar, or goldsmith. But the quantity of really every period, jewels were melted down and the metal
and stones recycled into new settings; vast amounts were
collectors and public museums. Ancient jewels and gems connoisseurs and acquired at auction at colossal prices. They are scattered among modern-day treasuries, in
museums and private collections around the world. At a time when most collectors were buying only Mughal jewels, some collectors and institutions perceived the
dynamic beauty of the jewels of South India, and in their efforts to acquire them, surely saved many from the
melting crucible. India: Jewels That Enchanted the World brings together this beautiful heritage for the first time. The
exhibition shows the continuity of tradition, the myriad influences that have been assimilated to form a unique Indian idiom, and the exchange of influences among Persia, India, and Europe.
Jewels and gems reside in the very soul of Hindustan.
Ancient Indians used the sobriquet Bird of Gold or Sone ki Chidia to refer to India. Gems represent eternity and jewels embody life, as best expressed in the words of
Frederick Kunz: “All the fair colors of flowers and foliage, and even the blue of the sky and the glory of the sunset clouds, only last for short time, and are subject to
continual change, but the sheen and coloration of
1. Major 1857, p. lxxv. The Russian historiographer Nikolai Karamzin discovered Nikitin’s manuscript. He writes, “Hitherto, geographers have ignored the fact that the
honor of one of the oldest voyages to India, undertaken and described by an European[,] belongs to the age and country of Ivan III.”
2. Nikitin was the first Russian ever to record his travels
by scholars to refer to either a species of juniper or sandalwood.
8. Iyengar 1982, p. 304. 9. Kunz 1971, p. v.
life in India in the period in which he traveled. His
writings are significant since they preceded the arrival of the Portuguese in 1498, but more importantly the invasion of Babur in 1526 and the establishment of Mughal rule in India.
3. Major 1857, pр. 14–15.
years to come. In a world of change, this permanence
5. Ibid.
has a charm of its own that was early appreciated.”9
wood, referred to in the Old Testament, is thought
in India. His writings provide a valuable insight into
precious stones are the same to-day as they were
thousands of years ago and will be for thousands of
7. Purchas 2012, p. 4. Almug (more commonly, algum)
4. Ibid, p. 24. 6. Ibid, p. 30.
left Detail of the necklace by Viren Bhagat. Bhagat, Mumbai, 2011. Private collection (cat. no. 315).
right Jewelry workshop. Photograph, Madras, 1870s. The British Library, London.
Introduction
25
the golden hilt of a seventeenth-century sword from the
plundered and dispersed. Nadir Shah distributed gems
poppy-blossom brooch (cat. no. 294). Bhagat jewels are
from India to Persia. Historical jewels have vanished,
Deccan (cat. no. 127) serves as inspiration for a sapphire formal, yet they manifest a grace and delicacy that balances exuberance and restraint.
In the five-hundred-year span that the exhibition
covers, vast quantities of jewelry were fabricated in
thousands of workshops—in palace ateliers and towns around the country, but also in the more than six
and jewels from the Mughal treasury all along his route gems have been recut and faceted in new ways, and
family heirlooms have metamorphosed into new forms in keeping with modern fashions: turban jewels have been converted into necklaces, armbands into bracelets, and amulets into pendants.
In recent years, the beauty, technical perfection, and
hundred thousand villages in India, each one with at
allure of old Indian gemstones have excited both private
old Indian jewelry that has survived is minuscule. In
of India that have survived are much coveted by
least one sonar, or goldsmith. But the quantity of really every period, jewels were melted down and the metal
and stones recycled into new settings; vast amounts were
collectors and public museums. Ancient jewels and gems connoisseurs and acquired at auction at colossal prices. They are scattered among modern-day treasuries, in
museums and private collections around the world. At a time when most collectors were buying only Mughal jewels, some collectors and institutions perceived the
dynamic beauty of the jewels of South India, and in their efforts to acquire them, surely saved many from the
melting crucible. India: Jewels That Enchanted the World brings together this beautiful heritage for the first time. The
exhibition shows the continuity of tradition, the myriad influences that have been assimilated to form a unique Indian idiom, and the exchange of influences among Persia, India, and Europe.
Jewels and gems reside in the very soul of Hindustan.
Ancient Indians used the sobriquet Bird of Gold or Sone ki Chidia to refer to India. Gems represent eternity and jewels embody life, as best expressed in the words of
Frederick Kunz: “All the fair colors of flowers and foliage, and even the blue of the sky and the glory of the sunset clouds, only last for short time, and are subject to
continual change, but the sheen and coloration of
1. Major 1857, p. lxxv. The Russian historiographer Nikolai Karamzin discovered Nikitin’s manuscript. He writes, “Hitherto, geographers have ignored the fact that the
honor of one of the oldest voyages to India, undertaken and described by an European[,] belongs to the age and country of Ivan III.”
2. Nikitin was the first Russian ever to record his travels
by scholars to refer to either a species of juniper or sandalwood.
8. Iyengar 1982, p. 304. 9. Kunz 1971, p. v.
life in India in the period in which he traveled. His
writings are significant since they preceded the arrival of the Portuguese in 1498, but more importantly the invasion of Babur in 1526 and the establishment of Mughal rule in India.
3. Major 1857, pр. 14–15.
years to come. In a world of change, this permanence
5. Ibid.
has a charm of its own that was early appreciated.”9
wood, referred to in the Old Testament, is thought
in India. His writings provide a valuable insight into
precious stones are the same to-day as they were
thousands of years ago and will be for thousands of
7. Purchas 2012, p. 4. Almug (more commonly, algum)
4. Ibid, p. 24. 6. Ibid, p. 30.
left Detail of the necklace by Viren Bhagat. Bhagat, Mumbai, 2011. Private collection (cat. no. 315).
right Jewelry workshop. Photograph, Madras, 1870s. The British Library, London.
Introduction
25
19
Necklace (manga malai)
South India, probably Tamil Nadu, 19th century Gold, diamonds, rubies, emeralds, colorless zircon and beryl, pearls
L. 63.5 cm, 10.5 × 12 cm (central element) The Khalili Collection, London, inv. No. JLY 1261
This splendid necklace consists of thirty-two
foliage with emerald-set leaves issue from this
work element (see also cat. nos. 18, 20). They are
pearls are attached to its lower edge.
mango-shaped units and a large central open-
strung on four gold chains that are only visible
central rosette, and clusters of rubies and
The clasp of the necklace is shaped as a pair
on the back of the necklace. Each mango-
of peacocks set with gemstones on the obverse
around a central diamond and is attached to
reverse. Although the back of the necklace is
shaped unit is set with twelve cabochon rubies small six-petaled rosettes of rubies with emer-
ald centers; above each rosette is an additional ruby in a small leaf-shaped setting. Between
each of the units is a spacer designed to fit the interstices and set with rubies. The tips of the
mango-shaped units are set on the front with a cabochon ruby and point away from the center of the necklace, so that each side of the necklace is the mirror image of the other.
At the center of the openwork element is an
eight-petaled rosette, set with table-cut dia-
monds around a central zircon. Symmetrical scrolls of ruby and diamond-set buds and
70
South India
and decorated with engraved designs on the
otherwise undecorated, the backs of the mango-
shaped units and the openwork central element suggest volume. P.M.C.
LITERATURE: Carvalho 2010, pp. 194–95, no. 104; Rogers 2010, pp. 368–69, no. 443.
19
Necklace (manga malai)
South India, probably Tamil Nadu, 19th century Gold, diamonds, rubies, emeralds, colorless zircon and beryl, pearls
L. 63.5 cm, 10.5 × 12 cm (central element) The Khalili Collection, London, inv. No. JLY 1261
This splendid necklace consists of thirty-two
foliage with emerald-set leaves issue from this
work element (see also cat. nos. 18, 20). They are
pearls are attached to its lower edge.
mango-shaped units and a large central open-
strung on four gold chains that are only visible
central rosette, and clusters of rubies and
The clasp of the necklace is shaped as a pair
on the back of the necklace. Each mango-
of peacocks set with gemstones on the obverse
around a central diamond and is attached to
reverse. Although the back of the necklace is
shaped unit is set with twelve cabochon rubies small six-petaled rosettes of rubies with emer-
ald centers; above each rosette is an additional ruby in a small leaf-shaped setting. Between
each of the units is a spacer designed to fit the interstices and set with rubies. The tips of the
mango-shaped units are set on the front with a cabochon ruby and point away from the center of the necklace, so that each side of the necklace is the mirror image of the other.
At the center of the openwork element is an
eight-petaled rosette, set with table-cut dia-
monds around a central zircon. Symmetrical scrolls of ruby and diamond-set buds and
70
South India
and decorated with engraved designs on the
otherwise undecorated, the backs of the mango-
shaped units and the openwork central element suggest volume. P.M.C.
LITERATURE: Carvalho 2010, pp. 194–95, no. 104; Rogers 2010, pp. 368–69, no. 443.
149
“Ranjitsinhji (‘Ranji’) Vibhaji, Maharaja Jam Sahib of Navanagar” Photograph
Lafayette Ltd., 1920
Modern print made from original photograph on ivory with watercolor 7.3 × 7.3 cm (image)
National Portrait Gallery, London, Inv. No. х133159
This photograph was donated by Stephen StuartSmith in memory of Hilda Margaret Ward
(formerly Lauder, 1920–2009) in 2009. Ph.C.
147
148
Bahadur, Yuvaraja of Mysore”
Rana of Jhalawar”
“Sir Sri Kanthirava Narasimharaja Wadiyar Photograph
Studios Bassano, June 24, 1920
Modern print from original negative 23.5 × 18 cm (image)
National Portrait Gallery, London, Inv. No. х78798 The negative from which this print was made was donated by Bassano & Vandyk Studios in 1974. Ph.C.
“Sir Bhawani Singh Bahadur, Maharaja Photograph
September 25, 1920
Modern print from original negative 23.5 × 18 cm (image)
National Portrait Gallery,
London, Inv. No. NPGx96761 The negative from which this print was made was donated by Bassano & Vandyk Studios in 1974. Ph.C.
150
“The Three Young Princes of Dhrangadhra Standing with Their Brother-in-law, H. H.
The Maharawal Chandraveer of Banswara” Photograph Ca. 1920
Modern print from original negative 25 × 16.7 cm
Cartier Archives, London, B808 J.F.
India and Europe: Interconnections in Jewelry Traditions
277
149
“Ranjitsinhji (‘Ranji’) Vibhaji, Maharaja Jam Sahib of Navanagar” Photograph
Lafayette Ltd., 1920
Modern print made from original photograph on ivory with watercolor 7.3 × 7.3 cm (image)
National Portrait Gallery, London, Inv. No. х133159
This photograph was donated by Stephen StuartSmith in memory of Hilda Margaret Ward
(formerly Lauder, 1920–2009) in 2009. Ph.C.
147
148
Bahadur, Yuvaraja of Mysore”
Rana of Jhalawar”
“Sir Sri Kanthirava Narasimharaja Wadiyar Photograph
Studios Bassano, June 24, 1920
Modern print from original negative 23.5 × 18 cm (image)
National Portrait Gallery, London, Inv. No. х78798 The negative from which this print was made was donated by Bassano & Vandyk Studios in 1974. Ph.C.
“Sir Bhawani Singh Bahadur, Maharaja Photograph
September 25, 1920
Modern print from original negative 23.5 × 18 cm (image)
National Portrait Gallery,
London, Inv. No. NPGx96761 The negative from which this print was made was donated by Bassano & Vandyk Studios in 1974. Ph.C.
150
“The Three Young Princes of Dhrangadhra Standing with Their Brother-in-law, H. H.
The Maharawal Chandraveer of Banswara” Photograph Ca. 1920
Modern print from original negative 25 × 16.7 cm
Cartier Archives, London, B808 J.F.
India and Europe: Interconnections in Jewelry Traditions
277
185
186
Design for a necklace
Necklace
Graphite and
Platinum, diamonds, rubies, pearls
By Cartier Paris, 1935
gouache on gray paper 29.8 × 18.6 cm
Cartier Archives, Paris,
By Cartier Paris, 1935
H. 20.5 cm, W. 16.5 cm Private collection
AT35/131
A commission from the maharaja of Patiala,
This diamond-ruby-and-pearl necklace was
beads and pearls were attached to this central
pearls, rubies, and diamonds. The necklace is
Bhupinder Singh, the maharaja of Patiala (r.
at the back with woven silk cords. Later, the tas-
this necklace was executed in platinum,
currently in a private collection. It is displayed
in the exhibition with some later modifications (cat. no. 186). C.K., E.Sh.
designed as part of a large commission from
1900–38). The front has an inner frieze of closely set pearls and rubies above a row of curving diamond-set “Oriental” elements, each set
with a ruby. At the center is a polygonal diamond link containing a ruby cluster. In the
original design, two pendant tassels of ruby
element (cat. no. 185), and the necklace was tied sels were removed and the gems were used to
make the three-row pearl-and-ruby band at the back that replaced the silk cords.
The jewel’s decoration hints at links with tra-
ditional Indian mango manga malai necklaces
(cat. nos. 18–20). Although the internal Cartier records usually referred to a conical element
with a bending terminal as an “Oriental palm leaf” (cat. no. 165), in India it has usually been linked to the shape of a mango. As Susan
Stronge has noted, even forms that resemble
conventional Indian types of jewelry were radically altered in Cartier’s designs, so that what
might seem a traditional Indian necklace was
unlike anything ever worn before by an Indian prince or mararani.1
This necklace was made entirely from the cli-
ent’s stones: 1159 pearls, 283 ruby beads, 13 pearshaped rubies, 59 other rubies, and 834 dia-
monds. Bhupinder Singh had first met Jacques Cartier in India in 1911. In 1925, the maharaja asked Cartier Paris to remodel several pieces
from his treasury. The work took until 1928 to complete. Comprising nearly two hundred
pieces in all, the collection was a fascinating
combination of traditional Indian forms with
jewels in a totally modern and Western idiom. While the large commission of 1925–28 com-
prised mainly state jewels to be worn by the
maharaja himself, this second group included a number of pieces made for the maharani, for
example a pair of ruby beads and pearl bracelets with diamond mounts. This necklace, however, was for a man, but later it is believed to have
been given by Bhupinder Singh to his daughter.
Henri Lavabre, whose workshop executed the
design for this necklace, headed one of the
major workshops in Paris working exclusively
for Cartier, from 1906 to 1921 and was again one of preferred suppliers in 1930s. J.R., E.Sh.
1 Stronge 2001. This is the most detailed account to date, and compares the Patiala jewels with their Indian prototypes. The Cartier Patiala jewels are also discussed in Jaffer 2006, pр.
71–79; and Prior, Adamson 2000, pр. 164–68.
306
India and Europe: Interconnections in Jewelry Traditions
185
186
Design for a necklace
Necklace
Graphite and
Platinum, diamonds, rubies, pearls
By Cartier Paris, 1935
gouache on gray paper 29.8 × 18.6 cm
Cartier Archives, Paris,
By Cartier Paris, 1935
H. 20.5 cm, W. 16.5 cm Private collection
AT35/131
A commission from the maharaja of Patiala,
This diamond-ruby-and-pearl necklace was
beads and pearls were attached to this central
pearls, rubies, and diamonds. The necklace is
Bhupinder Singh, the maharaja of Patiala (r.
at the back with woven silk cords. Later, the tas-
this necklace was executed in platinum,
currently in a private collection. It is displayed
in the exhibition with some later modifications (cat. no. 186). C.K., E.Sh.
designed as part of a large commission from
1900–38). The front has an inner frieze of closely set pearls and rubies above a row of curving diamond-set “Oriental” elements, each set
with a ruby. At the center is a polygonal diamond link containing a ruby cluster. In the
original design, two pendant tassels of ruby
element (cat. no. 185), and the necklace was tied sels were removed and the gems were used to
make the three-row pearl-and-ruby band at the back that replaced the silk cords.
The jewel’s decoration hints at links with tra-
ditional Indian mango manga malai necklaces
(cat. nos. 18–20). Although the internal Cartier records usually referred to a conical element
with a bending terminal as an “Oriental palm leaf” (cat. no. 165), in India it has usually been linked to the shape of a mango. As Susan
Stronge has noted, even forms that resemble
conventional Indian types of jewelry were radically altered in Cartier’s designs, so that what
might seem a traditional Indian necklace was
unlike anything ever worn before by an Indian prince or mararani.1
This necklace was made entirely from the cli-
ent’s stones: 1159 pearls, 283 ruby beads, 13 pearshaped rubies, 59 other rubies, and 834 dia-
monds. Bhupinder Singh had first met Jacques Cartier in India in 1911. In 1925, the maharaja asked Cartier Paris to remodel several pieces
from his treasury. The work took until 1928 to complete. Comprising nearly two hundred
pieces in all, the collection was a fascinating
combination of traditional Indian forms with
jewels in a totally modern and Western idiom. While the large commission of 1925–28 com-
prised mainly state jewels to be worn by the
maharaja himself, this second group included a number of pieces made for the maharani, for
example a pair of ruby beads and pearl bracelets with diamond mounts. This necklace, however, was for a man, but later it is believed to have
been given by Bhupinder Singh to his daughter.
Henri Lavabre, whose workshop executed the
design for this necklace, headed one of the
major workshops in Paris working exclusively
for Cartier, from 1906 to 1921 and was again one of preferred suppliers in 1930s. J.R., E.Sh.
1 Stronge 2001. This is the most detailed account to date, and compares the Patiala jewels with their Indian prototypes. The Cartier Patiala jewels are also discussed in Jaffer 2006, pр.
71–79; and Prior, Adamson 2000, pр. 164–68.
306
India and Europe: Interconnections in Jewelry Traditions
G
em cutting encompasses all the various methods
by which raw precious and semiprecious stones are transformed into regular (albeit sometimes asym-
rite, onyx, agate, carnelian, and jasper.
Until the fifteenth century the majority of customers for
metrical) polyhedrons by splitting, grinding, and polishing
Indian diamonds were exclusively members of the Indian
sapphires, topazes, emeralds, rubies, and others) are cut,
well as rich Indian, Jewish, and Arab merchants (wholesale
them. Both natural and synthetic gemstones (diamonds,
and there are a great number of types of cut. The oldest cut is probably the cabochon, in which the surface of the raw
stone is simply polished to produce a smooth convex shape. The step cut is also widespread; in this cut, both the face and the back of the stone are cut into a series of terraced steps with horizontal edges. Faceted cuts, in which the
stone is reduced by any of several prescribed sequences of
cuts to yield an array of facets, are more suitable for transparent gemstones.
The supreme skill of gem cutters is best represented in the
various types of brilliant cuts used in working with dia-
monds. It seems that the brilliant cut first appeared in sev-
enteenth-century Venice, and the Venetian jeweler Vincenzio Peruzzi is thought by many scholars to be its inventor. Medieval Indian lapidaries had already developed the related but simpler rose cut for diamonds.
Although the history of the diamond industry as well as
that of the art of glyptics (carving and engraving, especially on precious stones) goes back many centuries, diamond cutting in the modern sense of the term did not develop before the sixteenth century. Apart from the fact that diamonds
are extremely hard and therefore difficult to work with, the relatively late development of techniques for cutting dia-
monds was determined by other factors as well. For nearly
appendix
Southeast Asia—various semiprecious stones, such as neph-
two millennia, India remained the world’s only source of
diamonds; however, the market for diamonds was always very limited. After the fall of the Roman Empire, regular
elites: rajas and their courtiers and Hindu temple priests, as dealers) involved in transcontinental trade. Merchants used diamonds as compact, convenient, and secret investments, since diamonds are one of the most expensive commodities
in human history, as much as ten times more valuable than gold per unit of weight—even though, as is well known,
uncut diamonds are as a rule rather unremarkable and less visually attractive than colored gems, such as rubies, sapphires, and emeralds.
The specific qualities of diamonds determined their use
in early medieval India, where diamonds were reserved
exclusively for high-caste men. The stones were mostly valued for their magical qualities, since a diamond was
believed to bestow prosperity upon its owner—although they were also capable of causing countless disasters. A large diamond of high quality was extremely rare and expensive, and such stones would only be stored in a
prince’s or a temple’s treasury. These qualities—their talis-
manic nature, rarity, and costliness—explain why in India in this period diamonds were generally not cut: jewelers
preferred to use the natural crystals in their original shape.
The gems’ magical properties were paramount. According to the views of ancient and early medieval Indians, a diamond was, first and foremost, a magical object and a talisman for its owner; any alteration of it was prohibited, since changing the stone might corrupt its original quality and consequently undermine its magical power.
The first reliable references to diamonds come from the
trade between Europe and India all but ceased, and in
beginning of the first millennium CE. The Arthashastra, a
ered to be beautiful or valuable. The East preferred pearls,
text ever to give an account of the varieties and colors of
India’s neighboring countries diamonds were not considcolored translucent gems and—especially in China and
famous treatise on the art of politics, is probably the first Indian diamonds and the locations of their deposits.1 The
Methods of Gem Cutting and Gem Setting: A Synthesis of Inspiration, Calculation, and Skill Olga Vecherina
Appendix
415
G
em cutting encompasses all the various methods
by which raw precious and semiprecious stones are transformed into regular (albeit sometimes asym-
rite, onyx, agate, carnelian, and jasper.
Until the fifteenth century the majority of customers for
metrical) polyhedrons by splitting, grinding, and polishing
Indian diamonds were exclusively members of the Indian
sapphires, topazes, emeralds, rubies, and others) are cut,
well as rich Indian, Jewish, and Arab merchants (wholesale
them. Both natural and synthetic gemstones (diamonds,
and there are a great number of types of cut. The oldest cut is probably the cabochon, in which the surface of the raw
stone is simply polished to produce a smooth convex shape. The step cut is also widespread; in this cut, both the face and the back of the stone are cut into a series of terraced steps with horizontal edges. Faceted cuts, in which the
stone is reduced by any of several prescribed sequences of
cuts to yield an array of facets, are more suitable for transparent gemstones.
The supreme skill of gem cutters is best represented in the
various types of brilliant cuts used in working with dia-
monds. It seems that the brilliant cut first appeared in sev-
enteenth-century Venice, and the Venetian jeweler Vincenzio Peruzzi is thought by many scholars to be its inventor. Medieval Indian lapidaries had already developed the related but simpler rose cut for diamonds.
Although the history of the diamond industry as well as
that of the art of glyptics (carving and engraving, especially on precious stones) goes back many centuries, diamond cutting in the modern sense of the term did not develop before the sixteenth century. Apart from the fact that diamonds
are extremely hard and therefore difficult to work with, the relatively late development of techniques for cutting dia-
monds was determined by other factors as well. For nearly
appendix
Southeast Asia—various semiprecious stones, such as neph-
two millennia, India remained the world’s only source of
diamonds; however, the market for diamonds was always very limited. After the fall of the Roman Empire, regular
elites: rajas and their courtiers and Hindu temple priests, as dealers) involved in transcontinental trade. Merchants used diamonds as compact, convenient, and secret investments, since diamonds are one of the most expensive commodities
in human history, as much as ten times more valuable than gold per unit of weight—even though, as is well known,
uncut diamonds are as a rule rather unremarkable and less visually attractive than colored gems, such as rubies, sapphires, and emeralds.
The specific qualities of diamonds determined their use
in early medieval India, where diamonds were reserved
exclusively for high-caste men. The stones were mostly valued for their magical qualities, since a diamond was
believed to bestow prosperity upon its owner—although they were also capable of causing countless disasters. A large diamond of high quality was extremely rare and expensive, and such stones would only be stored in a
prince’s or a temple’s treasury. These qualities—their talis-
manic nature, rarity, and costliness—explain why in India in this period diamonds were generally not cut: jewelers
preferred to use the natural crystals in their original shape.
The gems’ magical properties were paramount. According to the views of ancient and early medieval Indians, a diamond was, first and foremost, a magical object and a talisman for its owner; any alteration of it was prohibited, since changing the stone might corrupt its original quality and consequently undermine its magical power.
The first reliable references to diamonds come from the
trade between Europe and India all but ceased, and in
beginning of the first millennium CE. The Arthashastra, a
ered to be beautiful or valuable. The East preferred pearls,
text ever to give an account of the varieties and colors of
India’s neighboring countries diamonds were not considcolored translucent gems and—especially in China and
famous treatise on the art of politics, is probably the first Indian diamonds and the locations of their deposits.1 The
Methods of Gem Cutting and Gem Setting: A Synthesis of Inspiration, Calculation, and Skill Olga Vecherina
Appendix
415