32 V. Ball — On the Diamond Mines [No. 1, 



It is not within the scope of this communication to describe the 

 mines themselves, that I have done already elsewhere and hope to do 

 so again more fully hereafter. It is from the historical point of view alone 

 that they are discussed at present. 



I. Gani- Coulour not identical with G ant-Partial Lat. 16° 39' 

 Long. 80° 27' but with Kollur Lat. 16° 42' 30" Long. 80° 5'. 

 (Atias Sheet No. 75.) 



The mines at Gani called also Coulour by the Persians were situated, 

 according to Tavernier, seven days' journey eastwards from Golconda.* In 

 a subsequent chapterf to that in which the above statement is made he 

 adds some details regarding the route. The itinerary being as follows : 



Golconda to Almaspinde, 3| Gos ( ? 2|) 



Almaspinde to Kaper, r 2 ,, 



Kaper to Montecour, 2| „ 



Montecour to Nagelpar, 2 „ 



Nagelpar to Eligada, 4 1^ ,, 



Eligada to Sarvaron, , 1 }> 



Sarvaron to Mellaserou, 1 „ 



Mellaserou to Ponocour, 1^ „ 



From Ponocour you have only to cross the river 

 to Coulour or Gani. 



Total 14f Gos. 



The total of these items amounts to 14f gos and in the English edition of 

 the Travels % amounts to 15f. But it must be concluded that both tables 

 contain misprints since Tavernier expressly says that the distance was 13f gos 

 or 55 French leagues the gos being equal to 4 leagues. Taking this 

 league to be equal to 4,444^ metres its value expressed in English miles 

 would be 2-78 and therefore the gos (2*78 x 4) would be equal to 11*12 

 English miles,§ or rather less than the modern Indian stage distance of 

 6 coss or about 12 miles. The distance of Coulour from Golconda was 

 therefore, by the route taken by Tavernier, 153 miles (11-12 x 13*75.) 

 It is impossible to identify all the names of stages mentioned in the 

 above list, some of them as Almaspinde and Montecour have a very 



* Voyages, Liv. II, Chap. XVI, p. 304, Paris, 1677. 

 f Idem., Chap. XVIII, p. 316. 

 X Lond. fol 1684, p. 142. 



§ Heyne (Tracts, p. 94) mentions the Gow as a term in use in his time (1795). 

 It was, he says, equal to eight miles. 



