Acquaintance of the Chinese with the Diamond 51 



under this heading in the Pin ts'ao. We have seen that what is de- 

 scribed in this work, owing to the strict conformity with classical tradi- 

 tions, refers to nothing but the diamond; and it was the black diamonds 

 which were chosen as graving-implements. According to Smith, 

 Cambodja, India, Asia Minor, the country of the Hui-k'i (Uigur), and 

 other countries of Asia, are said to possess this stone. Cambodja is 

 intended for Fu-nan; and the country of the Uigur, as has been shown, 

 is merely the theatre of action for the legend of the Diamond Valley in 

 the version of Chou Mi (this statement is devoid of any geographical 

 value). If the prefecture of Shun-ning in Yun-nan, as stated by Smith, 

 yields the present supply of corundum used in cutting gems, this is an 

 entirely different question. If the name kin-kang is bestowed on 

 corundum-points, it is a commercial term, which does not disprove that 

 the kin-kang of ancient tradition was the diamond, or prove that it 

 was a kind of corundum. The diamond-points formerly imported were 

 naturally scarce; and the Chinese, recognizing the high usefulness of 

 this implement, were certainly eager to discover a similar material in 

 their country, fit to take the place of the imported article. 1 This is a 

 process which repeated itself in China numerous times: the impetus 

 received from abroad acted as a stimulus to domestic research. If such 

 a stone was ultimately found, it was termed kin-kang, not because this 

 stone was confounded with the diamond, but for the natural reason that 

 it was turned to the same use as the diamond-point; in other words, the 

 name in this case does not relate to the stone as a mineralogical species, 

 but to the stone in its function as an implement. Consequently it is 

 inadmissible to draw any scientific inferences from the modern applica- 

 tion of the word kin-kang as to the character of the stone mentioned in 

 the earlier records of the Chinese. 



A. J. C. Geerts, 2 in his very useful, though occasionally uncritical 

 work, charges the Chinese books with the defect of having constantly 

 confounded the diamond with corundum, adamantine spar, pyrope, 



1 This is proved by the Arabs. The Arabic lapidarium of the ninth century, 

 attributed by tradition to Aristotle, demonstrates that Chinese emery was known to 

 the Arabs: the localities where it is found are the islands of the Chinese Sea, and it 

 occurs there as a coarse sand in which are also larger and smaller hard stones (Ruska, 

 Steinbuch des Aristoteles, p. 151). The Arabs certainly did not confound this 

 Chinese emery with the diamond, nor did the Chinese. This is demonstrated also 

 by Ibn Khordadbeh, who wrote his Book of the Routes and Kingdoms between 844 

 and 848, and according to whom diamond and emery, the latter for polishing metal, 

 were exported from Ceylon (G. Ferrand, Relations de voyages arabes, persans et 

 turks rel. a l'Extr6me-Orient, Vol. I, p. 31). Diamond and emery, accordingly, 

 were distinct matters in the eyes of the Arabs, Ceylonese, and Chinese. 



1 Les produits de la nature japonaise et chinoise, pp. 201-202, 356-358 (Yoko- 

 hama, 1878, 1883). 



