48 The Diamond 



Here, again, it is unfortunate that our knowledge fails us: the ancient 

 Indian sources exhibit the same lack of information on the identical 

 points as does Pliny. S. K. Aiyangar 1 justly points out that in the 

 description of the diamond, as given in the Arthacastra (quoted above, 

 p.^16), " there is nothing to warrant the inference that diamonds were 

 artificially cut; but, perhaps, the fact that diamonds were used to bore 

 holes in other substances makes it clear that lapidary work was not 

 unknown." A very late work on gems, the Agastimata, in an appendix 

 of still later date, contains a curious passage in which the cutting of 

 diamonds is prohibited: "The stone which is cut with a blade, or 

 which is worn out by repeated friction, becomes useless, and its benevo- 

 lent virtue disappears; the stone, on the contrary, which is absolutely 

 natural has all its virtue." L. Finot, 2 to whom we owe the edition and 

 translation of this work, rightly points out that cutting and polishing are 

 clearly understood here; but another passage in the same treatise speaks 

 of it as a normal process, without forbidding what precedes the setting 

 of diamonds for ornaments, and we regret with Finot that these passages 

 cannot be dated. Garcia ab Horto, who wrote in 1563, informs us 

 that by the people of India natural diamonds were preferred to the cut 

 ones, in opposition to the Portuguese. 3 Tavernier (1605-89) describes 

 the diamond-polishing in the Indian mines by means of diamond-dust. 4 

 In the face of the Agastimata and Garcia's statements, suspicion is ripe 

 that diamond-cutting was introduced into India only by the Portuguese, 6 

 and that the employment of uncut stones was the really national fashion 

 of India. The passage in the additional chapter of the Agastimata, 

 as stated, cannot be dated with certainty, but it seems more probable 

 that it falls within the time of the Portuguese era of India than that it 



1 Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society, Vol. Ill, p. 130. 



* Lapidaires indiens, p. xxx. 



s Si come una vergine si preferisce ad una donna corrotta, cosi il diamante dalla 

 natura polito, e acconcio s'ha da preferire a quello, che dall'arte e stato lavorato. 

 Al contrario fanno i Portughesi, stimando piu quelli, che sono dall'artincio dell' huomo 

 acconci, e lavorati (Italian edition, p. 180). 



4 "There are at this mine numerous diamond-cutters, and each has only a steel 

 wheel of about the size of our plates. They place but one stone on each wheel, 

 and pour water incessantly on the wheel until they have found the 'grain' of the 

 stone. The 'grain' being found, they pour on oil and do not spare diamond-dust, 

 although it is expensive, in order to make the stone run faster, and they weight it 

 much more heavily than we do. . . . The Indians are unable to give the stones so 

 lively a polish as we give them in Europe; and this, I believe, is due to the fact that 

 their wheel does not run so smoothly as ours" (ed. of V. Ball, Vol. II, pp. 57, 58). 



5 Also Bauer (Edelsteinkunde, p. 302, 2d ed.) is of the opinion that the diamond- 

 cutting of Europe, which was developed from the end of the middle ages, has not 

 remained without influence upon India, and that perhaps the process was introduced 

 from Europe into India, or was at least resuscitated there. 



