If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:52:14 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry Ganesh
wrote: On Aug 8, 10:23*pm, Peter W. Rowe wrote: However, South African mines also produced a number of famous very large diamonds, including record holders. *Consider the Cullinan diamond, the star of Africa, and others. *Those record holders in the British Crown Jewels, *most of them at any rate, are South African. * But of course, the South African diamond mines don't have the millenia old history and lore of the Indian sources. But Koh-i-noor on records still is still the biggest finished diamond. As per http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A730801 the stone originally weighed 793 carats. Quite possibly, although the actual weight at the time, before being butchered in recutting in europe, is a bit uncertain, simply because records, and indeed the exact definition of the carat, may be hazy. However, Currently, it's not the biggest, or the finest, diamond around. And for sheer size, the Cullinan, originally weighing in at over 3100 carats (one and a third POUNDS) is still the largest rough diamond ever found, or at least, the largest one we have records of. It's also one of the finer quality stones ever found too. Peter |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:51:14 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry Ganesh
wrote: On Aug 10, 1:48*pm, Peter W. Rowe wrote: It is certainly true that India plays a major part in the diamond and jewelry industry today, and the world wide markets in both. *But please, don't let that fact blind you to the fact that the rest of the world is also rather involved as well... * I never said the rest of the world is not involved. But, just that diamonds here are different and there are lot of incidents (not just stories) surrounding them. Also, I heard that diamond from other mines are different from the Indian ones. I already have discussed the fact that their long history makes the Indian Diamond sources unique and different from more modern diamond mines. But gemologically, diamonds from India are not particularly special or unique. EVERY diamond mine has variances in the types of qualities they typically produce. This is true of the Indian sources as well. In some cases, it's possible to identify which mine a particular diamond came from, but usually, it's only a guess. Diamond ends up being quite uniform in it's gemological qualities as a mineral, and for most, it becomes quite difficult to determine even the exact country of origin. When differences exist, they are very minute, requiring complex scientific testing to determine with certainly. Indian diamonds are no different in this respect. There may indeed by differences in the average color or clarity of stones found in one location over another, but to say that Indian stones are somehow unique and different gemologically from all other diamonds is just plain wrong. Don't always trust what you read on the internet or hear "somewhere". If you think I'm wrong here, well, cite some references. And I don't mean some consumer guide. Find me some scientific or gemological grounds for your statement. I don't think you'll find one. An example of the typical sorts of differences between mines is well illustrated by the fact that the Australian mines produce a much higher percentage of pink and fancy color diamonds than other sources. But individual white diamonds from there are no different from other similar quality diamonds from elsewhere. Similarly, Alluvial diamonds (diamonds washed down by rivers to their current location away from the original kimberlite deposit) generally tend to be of higher clarity, simply because the stress and impacts of being washed away will tend to fracture and remove the lower quality stones. So diamonds from Sierra Leone, as one example, which tend to be alluvual deposts, tend to be higher quality than the usual mine output. Even color can vary from mine to mine, on average. Before the advent of the current GIA diamond grading system, it was common to use terms referring to several of the famous South African mines to describe color. But again, although these mines each produced more of a typical color, all of them produced a range of colors. So you could say many stones from a given mine were of a certain color range, and you might even refer to a stone by a name referring to a mine that was known for that color range, actually being sure that a stone came from one mine or another wasn't, and still usually isn't, possible. The same is true of Indian diamonds. Diamond is crystalized carbon. All diamonds are. The differences we use to distinguish between one or another for quality are quite minor in terms of the mineral itself. Peter Rowe G.G. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:02:18 -0700, Peter W. Rowe
discovered a keyboard and, for our edification and amusement, submitted However, Currently, it's not the biggest, or the finest, diamond around. And for sheer size, the Cullinan, originally weighing in at over 3100 carats (one and a third POUNDS) is still the largest rough diamond ever found, or at least, the largest one we have records of. It's also one of the finer quality stones ever found too. Peter Allin all, gentlemen, this exchange has been one of the most enjoyable and educational instances of Chauvinism I've come across -- and I do NOT mean anything derogatory in the use of that term. I grant you both the laurel wreaths! Blessed be, for sure... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:02:18 -0700, Peter W. Rowe
discovered a keyboard and, for our edification and amusement, submitted However, Currently, it's not the biggest, or the finest, diamond around. And for sheer size, the Cullinan, originally weighing in at over 3100 carats (one and a third POUNDS) is still the largest rough diamond ever found, or at least, the largest one we have records of. It's also one of the finer quality stones ever found too. Peter Allin all, gentlemen, this exchange has been one of the most enjoyable and educational instances of Chauvinism I've come across -- and I do NOT mean anything derogatory in the use of that term. I grant you both the laurel wreaths! Blessed be, for sure... |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:39:23 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry Jim
wrote: On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:02:18 -0700, Peter W. Rowe discovered a keyboard and, for our edification and amusement, submitted However, Currently, it's not the biggest, or the finest, diamond around. And for sheer size, the Cullinan, originally weighing in at over 3100 carats (one and a third POUNDS) is still the largest rough diamond ever found, or at least, the largest one we have records of. It's also one of the finer quality stones ever found too. Peter Allin all, gentlemen, this exchange has been one of the most enjoyable and educational instances of Chauvinism I've come across -- and I do NOT mean anything derogatory in the use of that term. I grant you both the laurel wreaths! Blessed be, for sure... From Wikipedia, as good a definition as any. Similar to Websters for all intents and purposes... "Chauvinism" == in its original and primary meaning, is an exaggerated, bellicose patriotism and a blind belief in national superiority and glory. [1] By extension it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards a rival group..." Within the scope of that definition, I have to disagree with your characterization, sir. First of all, neither I, nor Ganesh, have written anything that suggests extreme or unreasoning partisanship, nor have either of us displayed anything even remotely sounding of malice or hatred. We're talking about stones only, after all, not cultures, peoples, national populations, or anything of that sort to which that term usually applies. Ganesh has shown us only that he's proud of the Heritage of Indian diamonds, and perhaps, jthat he's either less impressed with or less informed about diamonds from other sources. As I've also pointed out, Indian diamonds DO indeed have a wealth of history behind them that many other diamond sources do not have, and this is well deserving of respect, particularly when one of the main aspects of the desireability of diamonds or any other gem is in fact, the history and lore of those stones. . I've conceeded this, and certainly Ganesh seems to believe it. Nothing chauvinistic there. Simply a difference in opinion regarding the importance of some of the facts involved. Differences of opinion regarding various aspects of the facts, as well as perhaps some discounting of some of the facts may involve national pride, but in the absence of malice or disparaging comments about stones other than from India, I'd say there is nothing in this exchange that rises to the definition of chauvinism on Ganesh's part, and I certainly hope you're not suggesting that my posts meet that definition either. And for the record, even if you didn't mean it as such, the term itself carries negative connotations. Perhaps you'd care to substituted some less intense term? if indeed, Ganesh's posts had clearly shown the sort of emotional irrationality normally associated with the term chauvinist, I probably would not have bothered to react to his posts with any sort of reply. Were they really classic chauvinism, I'd probably in fact have rejected them as spam or otherwise against the terms of the group charter... Peter |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:00:58 -0700, Peter W. Rowe
discovered a keyboard and, for our edification and amusement, submitted From Wikipedia, as good a definition as any. Similar to Websters for all intents and purposes... "Chauvinism" == in its original and primary meaning, is an exaggerated, bellicose patriotism and a blind belief in national superiority and glory. [1] By extension it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards a rival group..." The primary definition, as you state it, Peter, smacks of "jingoism", and I meant no such thing. Further down in Webster's unabridged 3rd New International I find the phrase "attachment or partiality for a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged". I wrote using this standard, not the sense personified by Hippolytes' fictional soldier of Napoleon. And for the record, even if you didn't mean it as such, the term itself carries negative connotations. Perhaps you'd care to substituted some less intense term? It would seem that the term "chauvinism" has become too entrnched in your quoted definition. May I offer another antiquated phrase in its stead? How about "pride of place"? Or does this also suggest a super-abundance of patriotism? Respectfully submitted for your perusal... Jim Blessed be, for sure... |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Aug 11, 6:39*am, Jim wrote:
and educational instances of Chauvinism I've come across -- and I do NOT mean anything derogatory in the use of that term. I grant you both the laurel wreaths! Thanks for that one. No one has ever given one to me before and there's nothing wrong in Chauvinism. I never said I am not open to hearing what's there in other part of the world. On Aug 10, 1:48 pm, Peter W. Rowe wrote: "Ganesh, I'm going to guess, based just on your name, which sounds Indian, that you may have a certain bias here in favor if Indian diamonds." I am from India and I have not heard of magical stories associated with diamonds other than the ones from India, which makes it unique and special. There's nothing biased here about it. I did quote what I've so far gathered from my surroundings. I have come here to gather more information. Here in India diamonds are worn mostly to ward off evil effects of planets only upon consultation of an expert astrologer. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:00:58 -0700, Peter W. Rowe
discovered a keyboard and, for our edification and amusement, submitted From Wikipedia, as good a definition as any. Similar to Websters for all intents and purposes... "Chauvinism" == in its original and primary meaning, is an exaggerated, bellicose patriotism and a blind belief in national superiority and glory. [1] By extension it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards a rival group..." The primary definition, as you state it, Peter, smacks of "jingoism", and I meant no such thing. Further down in Webster's unabridged 3rd New International I find the phrase "attachment or partiality for a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged". I wrote using this standard, not the sense personified by Hippolytes' fictional soldier of Napoleon. And for the record, even if you didn't mean it as such, the term itself carries negative connotations. Perhaps you'd care to substituted some less intense term? It would seem that the term "chauvinism" has become too entrnched in your quoted definition. May I offer another antiquated phrase in its stead? How about "pride of place"? Or does this also suggest a super-abundance of patriotism? Respectfully submitted for your perusal... Jim Blessed be, for sure... |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:26:23 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry Jim
wrote: It would seem that the term "chauvinism" has become too entrnched in your quoted definition. May I offer another antiquated phrase in its stead? How about "pride of place"? Or does this also suggest a super-abundance of patriotism? Respectfully submitted for your perusal... That, Jim, seems a much more accurate phrase. Cheers, Peter |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Jewelry in India / Gems in India
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:25:54 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry Ganesh
wrote: I am from India and I have not heard of magical stories associated with diamonds other than the ones from India, which makes it unique and special. There's nothing biased here about it. I did quote what I've so far gathered from my surroundings. I have come here to gather more information. Here in India diamonds are worn mostly to ward off evil effects of planets only upon consultation of an expert astrologer. Certainly, the rich lore regarding diamonds from India is relatively unique to India. But I'd note that similar traditions equally exist in other cultures regarding other gems. The key is simply that in antiquity and forward, diamonds were well known in India, while not so well known elsewhere, so they had the chance and time to develop those traditions. To the extent that diamonds were known to other cultures, there certainly were stores and lore. It's just not such a rich tradition. And it's worth pointing out too, that the differences here do not suggest differences in diamonds themselves, or the diamonds from India as different from diamonds from elsewhere. What is different is not the diamonds, but rather the rich lore and culture that grew up around them. When you talk about magical stores, remember that the important term there is "stories". It's about the lore, and the culture and the history, rather than about the diamonds themselves. At the time that lore and culture was developing, the only diamonds known to that culture were from India, so it's not surprising that the lore develops only around stones from that source. As I've said from the beginning of this thread, there is no doubt that the long history of diamonds in India is important and unique to India. When you look, however, at the lore and history of other gems in other parts of the world, the Greek and Roman world for example. you equally find lots of magical stores and lore, and in fact, a little of that tradition includes diamonds too (or we would not have a current name, "diamond" derived from a Latin term, "Adamas". Even in ancient times in the Greek and Roman world, the hardness and unique qualities of diamond were well known, and given special status. But given it's relative rarity in that world, much less tradition could grow up around it. But there are indeed some stories about diamond that did not originate in India. At one time, especially in the middle ages and renaissance, it was thought that diamond powder was a deadly poison, for example. Who knows where that originated. But it likely had more to do with european alchemy than with India. And we have a good number of diamonds about which myths have grown, such as good or bad luck being associated with them. Some, such as the myth regarding the famous Hope diamond, are about stones that originally came from India. But not all. And that myth, and others, did not necessarily originate in India... Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kundan Jewelry India | jewelry India | Glass | 8 | April 5th 08 06:36 PM |
Aryavart Jewelry India | jewelry India | Glass | 1 | January 12th 08 04:28 PM |
Aryavart Jewelry India | jewelry India | Doll Houses | 0 | January 12th 08 03:57 PM |
Aryavart Jewelry India | jewelry India | Carving | 0 | January 12th 08 03:57 PM |
Aryavart Jewelry India | jewelry India | Beads | 0 | January 12th 08 03:54 PM |