Introduction

Indian Diamonds 123
are set in “the Begum’s brooch, the Rani’s Bracelet” (Marsh 46). Without any
further explanation, these designations co-exist with the collective name of the
jewels as “Datchet Diamonds”. Doyle calls his diamond after the once existent
Great Mogul but changes its history. This diamond, of course, also evokes Indian
rule through the Mogul dynasty. Its last descendant, Bahadur Shah II, was briefly
installed as Indian emperor during the Mutiny but disposed of after the rebellion
had failed (Mehta 616). The Hindu and Muslim honorifics ‘rajah’, 'rani’, ‘begum’
and ‘Mogul’ in the diamonds’ names evoke their Indian owners and a history of
aristocratic possession, however indistinct.
The Koh-i-Noor’s name changed at least once, when Nadir Shah gave it the
present name instead of its older designation as Babur’s Diamond (Mersmann
178). Only in the Datchet Diamonds does the name of the English owners overwrite
the former possessive claims. In the Eustace Diamonds all former ownership
is erased.
While the Moonstone alone forms the centre in Collins’ novel, the other diamonds
are part of larger treasures. In Stevenson, however, the treasure gradually
disintegrates, and the diamond is the last and most representative item that is left
in the end. In The Sign of Four the treasure stays intact, but the diamond again
represents and chrystallises its significance into one single object. They are both
elevated from the unnamed mass of lesser diamonds which highlights their special
status.
The direct descriptions of the Moonstone and the Rajah’s Diamond draw on a
similar vocabulary and imagery. In The Moonstone, the paramount impression which
is evoked through its depiction is its “unfathomable” nature. It is described in
greatest detail by Betteredge:
As large, or nearly, as a plover’s egg! The light that streamed from it was
like the light of the harvest moon. When you looked down into the stone,
you looked into a yellow deep that drew your eyes into it so that they saw
nothing else. It seemed unfathomable: this jewel, that you could hold between
your finger and thumb, seemed unfathomable as the heavens themselves.
We set it to the sun, and then shut the light out of the room, and it
shone awfully out of the depth of its own brightness, with a moony gleam,
in the dark. (Collins, Moonstone 70)
The diamond’s property to glow in the dark possibly shows that Collins knew
King’s study (Hennelly 29) who, after all, asserts that the diamond “alone among
gems has the peculiarity of becoming phosphorescent in the dark, after long exposure
to the sun’s rays” (King 37). The radiance of the diamond is described as
“awful”, which foreshadows the sublime in the scene of its restitution. Furthermore,
it turns the light of the sun into a “moony gleam” which also lights its restitution
in the “dark, […] awful [and] mystic” light of the moon in India (Collins,
Moonstone 464).