Vol. IX, No. 11.] The Pitt Diamond. 453 
[N.S.] 
‘Cities and Towns, adjacent to Bengal, contained in Mr. Plaisted’ s 
Map, by a Gentleman who resided there many years,’”! 
; ‘At Jagranaut, there is a Pagod of another kind, which is 
resorted to by Pilgrims from all parts of India. It stands in a 
Plain about a Mile from the Sea, and is built of Stone in the 
shape of a Canary Pipe set on the end. It has no Windows, 
but is illuminated with Hundreds of Wax Tapers, which burn 
Day and Night. The Idol is an irregular Figure of Black Stone, 
with two rich Diamonds placed near the Top to represent Eyes, 
and the Nose and Mouth are not carved but painted with a 
red Colour....’’ 
Our researches have reached a stage where we may con- 
fidently deny all connection between Pitt’s diamond and the 
would form a fruitful theme for sagacity and critical acumen ; 
ut, we do not feel specially tempted just now to bring the 
texts together. 
Summary of the Question. 
Pitt’s allusion to the diamond in his letter (Madras, 
October 18, 1701) to Sir Stephen Evance, London, supposes 
an earlier allusion from his correspondent. The diamond was 
offered to Pitt at Madras in December 1701, bought by him in 
February (2) 1702, and sent home on October 9, 1702. On 
cused o v. : 
] 
Company probably apprehended trouble from the Great Moghul, 
betors honk seal seat appears oe have charged Pitt of 
that it had lett the country long ago. Pitt’s emphatic declara- 
tion (Bergen, July 29, 17 10) of how he obtained the diamond 
from the jeweller Jarchand leaves us in the dark about its pro- 
venance; but, Hamilton’s account (ante 1728) obtained from 
Glover, who had introduced Jarchand to Pitt, points to the 
Golkonda mines. So does the account of Salmon (1752), who 
absolves Pitt from all manner of compulsion. The diamond 
had been sold to France in 1717. 
i ist 1 from Calcutta 
I 1] Bartholomew Plaisted’s A Journa 
in Reagan Oe 3 aoe England in the year MDCCL. 2nd _ grrr 
1757. “Our Calcutta libraries appear not to possess any copy o ve 
60. C : ‘*The East India 
here [at Cuttack], some of the 
Factory here [ 17? ] 50." ‘ct z 
Past and Present, Vols. III & IV, pp. 602-603, through which I quote. 
