Who do you think should own the Koh-i-noor diamond now? Let me know below. You can also find me on Patreon at www.patreon.com/historycalling and on my Amazon storefront at www.amazon.com/shop/historycalling
The supreme court of India a few years ago has ruled that the Diamond was not illegally taken, making it not a crime and not seen as illegitimately aquired.
I found out about this diamond when I worked in an Indian restaurant and they were telling me the story so it shows you that the Indian people haven't forgot . 🇬🇧
But was it a gift or a ransom? And is a ransom considered a legitimate transfer of ownership? Coz if its not, then u have to go back further in the ownership chain. Im not saying, just keep the diamond and screw every1 else. But its a very complicated proposition to find who, if any, of the claimant would be the rightful owner. It would require probably years of historical research, and even if u were able to construct a complete ownership chain, u would then have to consider each transfer of ownership for legitimacy. And all of that should still start with actually having it analyzed to establish, where it was mined in the first place. It would be a huge mistake to just say, that India says, its there, ok, give it back. Just consider, if the police has arrested a burglar and found some stolen jewelry. They then have to trace the rightful owner. 3 ppl all claim a certain necklace. Do u just give the necklace to the richest person? The 1 shouting the loudest? No, u have to figure out, who is the rightful owner. And thats very hard for a diamond, where u dont even know, where its originally from, and which has changed hands under murky circumstances more than once. That doesnt mean, u shouldnt try. The police in my parable wouldnt just keep the necklace and give up finding the rightful owner. But it may be extremely difficult to trace the rightful owner of the diamond back through the centuries, and ultimately it may be the politically least damaging thing to keep it and display it, but not use it, as no matter who was given the diamond, the other claimants would be furious. Again, they should definitely try to establish, where is the diamonds origin, where was it mined, and established the chain of custody and each claim to ownership.
@@HistoryCalling For you people yes. its just a rock. That DIamond wil always be a part of India/History. It should belong to them. For england its is a symbol of theft and Colonial History. At least what England can do is return Diamond back to India to atone for what they did to India.
Don't forget the two court cases in India where the COURTS decided that the diamond legitimately belonged to the UK, allegedly it did't originally belong to the Maharajah either as they nicked it in the first place. There is a great video covering this stone.
Dont make me laugh !! England obtained this diamond illegally during colonial war thanks to odious blackmail due to its rapacity and keeping it is as dishonest as if Germany had kept the works of art stolen during the last war and if the diamond was stolen before that does not change the fact that the English have always plundered half of the planet and they themselves are the biggest thieves in the world and sad shopkeepers..The English bought back Louis'XIV ' Blue Diamond stolen and recut it to cover their tracks...It is now the Hope diamond.. End of story
I find the cut it had before Prince Albert had it recut very interesting. Even though it may not have maximized it's potential, I find that cut intriguing and beautiful in it's own right. And who doesn't love a good "cursed jewel" story?? I think it's hard to know at this point who should own the diamond. I think there are many things that should be returned to their country of origin (Nefertiti's bust is always the first that comes to mind), but I'm not sure this is necessarily one of them. Regardless of whether it should or should not possess it, I don't see the British Monarchy giving it up. Another great story!!
Of course England need to return it to India (as well as everything else that was ‘gifted’ to them). And that they haven’t really shows how out of touch the British Royal Family is.
👏👏Love the mix of legend and letters, HC. Fascinating as always. I found it very interesting that some journalists questioned the legality of bringing the diamond to England even in the days when colonialism was prevalent and accepted by most. You're finishing up the year strong; can't wait for next week's offering. Be well, HC.
Happy Holidays to everyone who enjoyed this richly entertaining post! We are currently under ice and snow, so what better way to pass the time than watching History Calling?
I love your videos so much! I have long been a fan of history, in particular, English history (and I have NO IDEA why, but there it is). Regarding the jewel. It's a freaking rock. Why people fight over rocks, even pretty ones, I will never know. It's part of what is wrong with the human race in general, to fight over such stupid things, when there are much more important things to worry about. Still, I found this video intensely interesting, as I do all your videos, and I love your voice and accent. Thank you so much for these!
Thank you so much and yes, I agree, there are many much more important things in the world. Diamonds only have such a high value because we say they do (as opposed to things like water and food which have an intrinsic value in keeping us alive).
If another country packed up and moved Stonehenge or [insert native to British Isles object here], I would be shocked if there wasn't agitation for its return. The Stone of Scone has only been returned to Scotland since 1996...
But as I have commented in other threads, its different. There would be zero doubt as to the origins and rightful owners of Stonehenge, just like the "Elgin" Marbles and other such treasures, that were stolen from their known place of origin. Its much more complicated to establish rightful ownership to minor items, that have gone through multiple owners/"owners" through centuries, coz u both have to trace the chain of custody back to the origins of the item, and then u have to analyze each change of custody for whether or not it was a legitimate change of ownership. Many smaller items, especially jewels, ornaments, paintings and such have stolen more than once or used as ransom or bribery or such. So who along the chain were rightful owners, who were not? Thats very hard to establish. The origins of Stonehenge.... not so much.
Hi HC, thanks for bringing us another interesting video. I think that the diamond should have remained uncut and left in its natural beauty. Rather than have been cut into to meeting the latest fashion. Also as to who should own it now, I wouldn’t want to open that Pandora’s box. Have a Merry Christmas and I look forward to more learning in the new year.
That DIamond wil always be a part of India/History. It should belong to them. For england its is a symbol of theft and Colonial History. At least what England can do is return Diamond back to India to atone for what they did to India for good karma. Or they just can Ignore it. Bad karma. Indians wont forget.
Great stuff as always, but.... the jokes on you all. I bought this stone and a rare Rolex watch from a guy on the street in London some five years ago.😀 Got a great deal too!
Merry Christmas, my dear Dr Ms History. I hope your Christmas is as amazing as you are. ❤️ How funny. Twice this week I’ve heard about this stone. We were discussing it at work. I’m half Indian, so my work place were asking my opinion on it. I couldn’t answer then, and I don’t think I could now. It’s such a difficult line to tread. On one hand it’s a cultural icon, but on the other it’s absence has done nothing bad, in as far as that the country hasn’t sunk into the sea because the big shiny rock isn’t there. The world is scattered with different countries items that are far from home. Should we return our cars, as the chips are from another land? Where is the line to be drawn?
Thanks Jay and Merry Christmas to you too. ⛇ 🎄 You also make some very interesting points about the stone. I'm not sure what the best answer is either.
I fear the stone question will never be answered. There are too many claimants. It’s the same as if the imperial heritage seal of china were to be found. Who gets it? China, or Taiwan?
I don't really know who should possess this diamond now. However, I think one of the very weakest arguments offered was David Cameron's. He was virtually admitting how many treasures in the British museum were either taken through the demonstration of superior power, or given or sold to a British entity by someone who had a dubious claim to them! [In 1979, I saw a sign next to the so-called Elgin Marbles arguing that they were being better taken care of in the British Museum than they would be in Athens, which was preposterous even then.] There are superb museums all over the world where tourists can go to see cultural treasures curated by experts, if they have the money to travel and like to see things with their own eyes. Moreover, given the high quality of today's visual media, millions of people can get an excellent view of the world's most fabulous treasures through public or private online resources, books or films, regardless of where they are housed. Of course, this particular gem is not only kept on display but used in British coronations, but that alone would not be a good argument for keeping it in the UK. What is needed is for all the countries involved to come to an agreement about the most appropriate and safe place for the diamond to be kept, and that doesn't appear likely to happen anytime soon.
Yes, I agree that would be preferable but like you I doubt any such agreement will ever be reached. You're correct too that a lot of the stuff in the British Museum (and other museums) shouldn't really be there. I wonder if there will be a grand reckoning about that some day...
Humans do not “own” any piece of earth nor what is extracted from it. We are but mere stewards ~ the line can die out, pestilences, wars, greed… Then, some time around three/score and ten, the human soul journeys on, leaving behind such “treasures” for the next generations to fret, fuss, fight and fry… On turns The Wheel…
It is sad the diamond was recut. And there is too much controversy over who is the rightful owner. If I understand it, there are no living heirs of the maharaja and it is unlikely the British will give it to the modern Indian state. You know what they say about possession being 9/10th of the law…Despite the controversy, it is likely Camilla will wear it. Thank you for another intriguing video! Merry Christmas!
I never understood why the people of today complain about the theft taken place hundreds of years ago. Like my ancestors had tons of stuff stolen from them but I certainly don't think that the people NOW should be punished for it. Its a stone involved in many cultures, so does it really need to be owned by anyone?
Lots of countries lose things when treaties are signed. If they were all given back as if the treaty never existed, more of Europe would be speaking German, and more of Central Asia would be speaking Russian.
This sounds like the most colonizing conversation I’ve ever read. That’s crazy. England invaded India, had the nerve to call the resulting wars “unprovoked” and then took the diamond from an actual child! How is this messy or confusing? That’s illegal terrorism by today’s standards. It doesn’t belong to the UK. Someone somewhere in India should have it and India should decide that.
Merry Christmas. When my Yorkie dog saw the snow; He became worried about you. He thought something had happened to you. He was gonna to go and find you. Your his second favorite aunt.
What an interesting piece of history! I unfortunately don’t see any way the stone can be returned to any one land or region without resulting in mayor conflicts and possibly wars being fought over it. I am conflicted when it comes to it being right for it to be kept by the UK, but I do deem it to at this point to be the best option.
I don't think any one country should own the Koh-i-noor. The diamond is the gifted property of and surrendered in treaty to the Crown. King Charles III is the head of the Commonwealth and heir to the Crown jewels. The diamond is a part of our collective Commonwealth history, not just England or the United Kingdom and certainly not just India, considering its relationship to Pakistan. I think it is unfortunate that the diamond was re-cut under the direction of Prince Albert. Maintaining its Indian style, regardless of its lack of luster would have at least shown greater reverence to the diamond's origin and India's place within the Commonwealth of Nations.
I hope you have a good Christmas and the New Year a continuing success for you. All of your videos are well thought out and interesting. As for the Diamond, I can’t see that it’s possession increased the “good” of anyone who owned it. It’s a rock, a pretty one, but a rock. 🎄🥰
I say give it back to the Indians. They're the ones who had it last - this isn't the best solution, but it is the most impartial. The English shouldn't keep it, as "finders keepers" has always seemed like a flimsy excuse for keeping other people's things
It DEFINITELY needs to go back to India, it's a shame the U.K has not given it back, it just shows that the U.K has not changed as much as they think they have. It's pretty SAD!!!
I am not really sure if the kohinoor should be returned to any of the 3 countries , considering there is not much care for historical artefacts or history for that matter ( until some war breaks in between or political unrest occurs ) , but displaying it as a possession of the country does leave a sour feeling ( especially since Dalhousie was involved ) . As for matching the English aesthetics, it does make sense that Prince Albert chose to do that since it all comes down to displaying it to a common man who would have not known what to appreciate in something that doesn't fit his definition of a diamond . Could've been handled with care though
I don’t think Camilla will wear it, like her or not she’s aware of its troubled history. I wasn’t aware that other countries were claiming it, my opinion is that it should go to India (if it ever is returned). That’s where it originated
@@HistoryCalling If she wears it, I am sorry to say it will be 4ever cursed, it was previously desecrated when it was cut ...Let it then stay with them.
Thanks Sean. I ended up rather sick with a vomiting bug on Christmas night actually, but at least I had the whole day before that. Have a happy new year :-)
@@HistoryCalling My family gave me a bloody cold when I arrived home from visiting them, THEN my heater started to croak yesterday so it's 13 degrees (Celcius because I know we yanks only use the F word lol) in my house. lol
Do you think it could be possible that the quoted spectator from the Great Exhibition may have written this after the diamond was cut and has skewed a account because the account seems to describe the diamond before and after it was cut??
This colonial thing annoys me. England was not colonised by Germany,the Romans, the vikings, the French Normans because they wanted to plunder her tin….. no we were conquered and it has happened throughout history all over the world 😡 this is not at you by the way-good video 😊
@Lorraine Casey….as has every other country on this planet. The people that hold these countries today are the ones that won the last war and were strong enough to hold it from being taken again. There’s not a country or race of people that haven’t been captor and slave and then traded places. It’s been the way of the world for millennia.
Yes, it is very true that conquests have happened throughout history and might well continue to happen. There's the obvious attempt happening in Europe right now for instance.
Apparently, on being asked the price of the Kohinoor, Maharaja Ranjit Singh had said. “paanch jooti”, which translates literally to “five slaps with a shoe” - a figure of speech common in India for “humiliating application of force”. His prediction was correct. Whether he continues to be correct in the future remains to seen.
Regarding the 19th century cut of the diamond, surely an oval cut or even a pear shape would have been possible without sacrificing such a high percentage of the stone. But maybe they weren't doing those shapes yet. Also given the confused history of possession of the stone, and we don't actually know where it was mined, I think it should stay in the UK, but Camilla definitely shouldn't wear it. Given her _penchant_ for the seemingly largest tiaras available, she probably will. We're finally above zero Fahrenheit (-18 C) here after recording the lowest temp (-24F) in Denver in over 30 years overnight Wed. into Thurs.Happy Holidays to all!
THANKS STEPHEN. My main gift was actually a bookcase, so it won't fit under the tree, though it is made from one if that counts 😀 Have a wonderful Christmas too 🎅 🎄
Before the Brits were in India and during the beginning women who had lost their husbands would be sacrificed on a fire by moguls & holy men . So the Empire was not all bad and the Spanish and Dutch traded in more slaves as did Arab states .
Based on the reasoning for taking the diamond in the first place it looks like it should have been returned when England left India in 1947. The fact that it wasn't can be seen as hypocritical and indicates a completely different reason it was taken in the first place. It would have been a really symbolic gesture to return it at that time, however during that turbulent time where a new government was being established, a process that ultimately split India into three separate nations (India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh), I'm sure the diamond would have caused quite a bit of conflict. In the end the diamond should be returned to India. Pakistan doesn't really have a claim to it due to the fact it was at the insistence of the now Pakistanis to split away from India citing fears of persecution by the Hindi majority. The diamond was Indian. Pakistan left India, not the other way around. They shouldn't get to take the "family heirlooms" with them. It would be nice if people just saw it as heritage instead of a fortune. Then maybe there wouldn't be all this fighting over it.
The history is so long and complicated that who knows who it "belongs" to. It should stay in Britain, it's most recent owner. I think it should be removed from the crown jewels and displayed in a museum, along with an extensive discussion of it's history...including the colonial aspects
I am sorry and I am not trying to patronise, but I do believe that this diamond is part of other people heritage, and these people are not the British. I understand that there is controversy about which country it should be repatriated to, as the modern political boundaries do not reflect the past ones and there are different places where this jewel was kept for long periods of time. Having said that, it came to the British as a symbol of colonial conquest. Time, political context (and hopefully mentality) have changed. Any feeling of entitlement to keep it on the British crown is quite surprising, if not worrying, and should be, in my opinion, reassessed.
@@mariangelalanza4930 whoever it could be given to, it would just cause more conflict with a bunch of other places claiming ownership. It would solve nothing.
@@cassieoz1702 I absolutely agree! Diplomatic relations are quite complex, and given the circuitous history of this gem, any effort to return it would be untenable - even in an attempt at goodwill - as it would only be interpreted as a showing of favoritism towards the recipient nation over other claimants. It would also be highly irresponsible on the part of the U.K. and affect their standing within the community of nations, as it would increase tensions and resentment in a region already rife with it. People lacking a full understanding of political circumstances fail to appreciate the delicate balance - on many fronts - entailed where foreign relations are concerned - and especially regarding those possessing of nuclear capabilities. We are speaking of countries marked by political instabilities, assassinations and attempts thereof, risks of coups, worries of the flow of weapons... I could go on. It is laughably naive to think that a 💎the worth of this one - and what that might buy - and what groups that could incentivize - isn’t a factor in these concerns. Akin to slavery in the U.S., Britain’s prior colonial rule is a fact that cannot be rectified by the conciliatory actions of the present. I firmly believe that efforts to return the gem would be construed on the world stage as Britain engaging in ineffectual image-polishing - and at the expense of their allies who go to great expense and at great pains to maintain equilibrium in South Asia. Not to be patronizing or anything (snort) but it’s a non-starter.
Brava, Kazoo Libra, for your superlative insight that the greatest positive value of this gem lies with its potential to educate others as to the misdeeds of the past. Your proposed solution is brilliant. 👏🏻
Of the three claimants, India has the best chance of keeping it safe. When the joyous day comes that there is peace in Afghanistan and Pakistan both should share with India the display of the diamond. A museum full of stolen treasures is nothing to be proud of!
India has the best chance of keeping it safe? Erm, no way it would be stolen in no time I’m sorry to say. The safest place it’s ever been in it’s history is in England where it currently is.
I think it should be returned to India. You have to think of India as it was at the time. Pakistan did not exist until 1947. So technically, most of the stone's existence was in the historical India. But then, I also think that the Elgin Marbles, more properly the Parthenon Sculptures, should be returned to Greece. A happy Yule to all!
Yes, I think India's claim is stronger than Pakistan's in this instance. I think the Parthenon Sculptures should go back too, but we'll have to wait and see what happens I guess.
The diamond seems to have moved around a lot - on a pendant, then on a bracelet, then in a crown. Could Camilla have it removed from the Queen Consort crown and replaced by a stone (not even necessarily a diamond - a ruby would be awesome) of her choice? Oh, and I think it belongs in England.
Definitely and I wouldn't be surprised if she does have it swapped out. It hasn't even been a part of the Crown Jewels for all that long in the grand scheme of things.
The East India Company threatened the 10 year old Maharaja with the death of his mother in exchange for the diamond? It was obtained by crime. It does not belong to England
@@cindiloowhoo1166 "I would think not subject to the whims of an individual, temporal, monarch…" You mean you think the Monarch can't even have it removed from the Queen Consort Crown? What about the fact that it has moved around before as said above? It was on pendant, a bracelet, then a crown. In any case, it was removed from the Queen Consort' Crown. Camilla did not wear the diamond.
Such interesting research and storytelling. As for the 19th century recutting of the Koh-I-Noor, I would chalk this up to British arrogance and racism.
Merry Christmas HC, you and your Diamonds haha, the diamond should not have been cut it has lost its natural beauty, as for ownership several countries have a claim on it, so it has to stay where it is until a solution is found but that won't be anytime soon. Thank you as always for our journey through the mists of time with you. 🎅🎄😊
There’s almost something sinister about the level of arrogance and entitlement it would take to think you had leave to alter a pilfered stone with such a rich history.
merry christmas HC! a year of amazing content down 🙌🏻 since it is -3 degrees F here, i’ll be spending my evening watching this and trying not to freeze 🤣 you know i love a jewel video!!
Basically, this beautiful stone has passed through to various owners, via either inheritance, spoils of war or through extortion. If you reject spoils of war for Britain, then you must also reject it for other countries too. Britain's claim is the latest claim of spoils of war. Britain went through 2 wars in India and many lives were lost on both sides. The diamond was also given, begrudgingly, as a gift directly to Queen Victoria. It makes no difference whether Duleep Singh wanted it back or not. The Indian Government has never owned the diamond, so their claim is spurious anyway. The only other potential owner would be the direct descendants of Duleep Singh, of which there are none. The last descendant died in 1959. As far as I can see, Britain's claim and ownership of the diamond, is pretty rock solid (sorry for the pun). The diamond is a working part of the Crown Jewels of the UK. It is honoured, protected, valued and is a symbol of our links to the subcontinent. It was given. You don't ask for gifts back, certainly not over 100 years since it was given.
seems like everyone who saw it before and after the cut was dissapointed- I wonder what it looked like and also, very suspicious that the offcuts dissapeared 😂 it's bakers priveledge to eat the offcuts of a cake, but I don't think jewellers privilege is 40% of the biggest diamond in the world to take home also, who knoews should have it now- the history was messy enouogh that no one's really got a clear claim but doesn't really feel like it belongs to the british monarchy (I say this as a brit), also, as much as it might be wildly expensive- it's also kinda pointless, like it jsut looks pretty, yes it's big but it's not really doing anything
I think we have to remember that this is just a carbon rock and belongs to the Earth. I think most of the people fighting over it would be pacified if the British Royals just acknowledged their mistakes in colonising other countries and taking their possessions and put the dimond in a museum.
@@HistoryCalling yeah absolutely right there's much more important thing than kohinoor so why britishers are not give it back? They will say that current generation are not responsible for that dark past on the other hand they will glorify and celebrates there past by holding that stolen things. Get a life brits apart from being hypocrates .
Even if it’s modern day “proper place” in India is in dispute, the following 3 simple truths are not in dispute: 1. It doesn’t belong in the UK 2. Even if we don’t where in India it belongs, we know that it belongs in India 3. It should be India’s business to decide where in India it belongs
I have three questions. 1. Do you think Henry 6th would have been more successful as A constitutional monarch ? 2. How was the relationship between queen Elizabeth I 's England and Japan ? 3. Do you think if Henry V had lived longer; would England have kept hold of France ?
I'm typing on my phone so I hope you don't mind me keeping this very brief: 1) Yes, if he'd lived 400 years later. 2) Don't know I'm afraid. 3) Yes, probably.
Hi, Awesome live video I enjoyed it can't wait to see more soon. Can you do a video about Michel de Nostradamus he was a historical person in the 16th century. Have a great day greetings from Canada 😀
Very informative history of the Kohinoor diamond. It was last owned by the young Sikh King of Panjab, Maharaja Dalip Singh. The British successfully dismentled the Sikh Monarchy.
If we should give back all items which were ever taken (by force or bought) it's ridiculous..where to begin, where to end?...and to whom because most of them changed owners several times in the history...🤔
What an informative video! As an aside, in hearing the commentary from a Victorian observer about how the gem shouldn't have been cut and judgements about the display really prove that even back then some randos gonna tell the world they know better.
I'm fascinated by the possibility that it could have originally been the Shamantaka jewel that Jambuvan and Krsna had a great battle over. I have known about this story for decades because I follow all the past times of Krsna. I have really enjoyed this video of the jewels history.
The diamond belongs to Goddess Bhadrakali. Wherever the diamond will be that Kingdom that Kingdom will be destroyed within decades. So better return it to Bhadrakali temple in Telangana, India.
The Diamond has No Owner it belongs to the Earth & She Gaia wants it to go to All the people of the World - for the Good of All that is - and so it is - Blessings.
It makes no sense that the this diamond is not worn yet its 2 accenting diamonds (now earings) were continued to be worn for decades and also the lahore pendant? Its very picky choosy
Thank you for another interesting historical gem-stone video! I'm just disappointed that you completely glossed over the fact that the British East India Company was key in expanding and spreading the opium trade. It's wealth came in large part through pushing opium on new populations, e.g. China.
You're welcome. It's not that I was trying to gloss over anything, it's just that this is already (by my standards) a very long video and it was about the diamond, rather than the history of the East India Company. That would be a completely different video and require lots of extra research using different sources. Perhaps I'll look at it in the future though.
@@HistoryCalling Thanks for your prompt reply. I appreciate it! I must admit to being personally invested in the topic. I’m ethnically Chinese and it really upsets me that most British people (including educated ones) believe that the “evil Chinese” pushed opium onto the rest of the world when, in fact, Britain used its military to force Chinese authorities to permit opium to be sold in China. I recognise that a video about the K-i-N diamond is not the place to go into the subject. But since you brought up the British East India Company and also (which I do appreciate!) tangentially the topic of colonialism, it would have been great to see some slight recognition of the fact that British wealth was also built on pushing opium. Great video on a touchy subject. I really do appreciate that you did mention a couple of the controversial topics 💖
Yes. The East India Company started the Opium Wars to destabilize Old Imperial China because the Chinese Emperor would not be coaxed or cajoled to have commerce with England where England had the affontery to pretty much demand that China take the short end of any deal in trade. Chinese Emperor declined and had them shown out for their rude hubris superiority on his turf.
Given the past of this diamond in how it has moved from one dynasty to other, and if the legends about the diamond hild any weight, it could be taken away from England. The modern day force would not be colonial or military, but geopolitical and strategic duress.
Well done HC. This bit of history held my interest for the full 30 minutes. England should hold it dear and it should be used in corinations. Merry Christmas!
It's 4 degrees Fahrenheit, or about 15 degrees Celsius in my home city. A very cold day. Hopefully it's much nicer and WARMER elsewhere. Another great video!!!
@@HistoryCalling wow, this is totally foreign to me, even though I've lived in Missouri now for almost two years. I guess I'm too used to California Weather.
If the British government give all the artefacts back to the countries of the original origin which are displayed in the museum they would only be stuffed foxes and hedgehogs left .
How many homes in the poorest parts of India could this diamond generate if sold? They need to give this diamond back to India. The poorest people in that country deserve it. They deserve to have homes built with the finances brought from the sale of this diamond.
The Blue Diamonds ,Tavernier and really any large Diamond are submerged in history, myth, intrigue ,betrayal ,destruction and controversy that I find fascinating . . they are pretty .. But When I reflect on all of it , .... it's a lot of bother for a Rock . I am all for returning stolen objects to their original owners . But I worry that some of these pieces of history and art will disappear .... especially if all our eggs are in one basket. Thanks for another trip through history.
Yes, these things so seem to attract trouble and wacky stories don't they? I agree actually that they are at the end of the day, just pretty carbon. There are many much more important things in the world.
Why does it seem the most important and coolest items always wind up in the hands of British and English kings and queens? It seems most are Ill gotten or mysteriously wind up in their hands. Strange.
I think it helps that they've outlasted so many other monarchies and been able to purchase some of their items. Some good things are elsewhere though, like the Hope Diamond in the Met.
@@HistoryCalling -- With all due respect, the Hope Diamond was gifted to and is on display at the Smithsonian Institute's Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C., not the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City.
It would be in better taste if Camilla did not have the Koh-I-Nor in the Queen Consort's crown. She likes blue. Maybe switch it out for a sapphire or aquamarine. Even a grown man made one with better atomic structure quality for flawlessness/brilliance.
I am undecided about who should have possession of the Koh-I-Noor diamond, though I do believe it should be someone other than the British royal family. Thank you for a most welcome Christmas present; this episode is a great gift. Best wishes to you and yours for the holidays and the coming new year!
As we now know, Queen Camilla did NOT use the Koh-i-noor in her crown at the coronation. Rather, she use the Cullinans 3 and 4. My question is...Given the 3 and 4 have always been the _personal_ property of the Queen and bequeathed to her by Queen Mary, does the use in the crown somehow make it "Crown" property? Has King Charles given it to the Crown? Where are the 3 and 4 now? In the Jewel house? I am very, very interested in learning the exact whereabouts of the 3 and 4 and what the future is for them!
The Royal Collection Trust currently says no more at its site than the jewels were inherited by Queen Elizabeth II. According to some articles the two Cullinan stones were "borrowed" for the occasion, which, I assume that they are still personal property.
Cutting off over 40% of the stone was definitely not worth it. It went from a unique shape to 'eh' and lost a lot of what made it so amazing. I think it's a fantastic example of European ideals being held up as "the right way" to do things with no regard for different values and preferences, when the original cut of the diamond made perfect sense to the prior owners and what they valued in the stone. (And frankly to me too: diamonds that size are RARE; why cut a bunch off just so it sparkles a bit more??)
Who do you think should own the Koh-i-noor diamond now? Let me know below. You can also find me on Patreon at www.patreon.com/historycalling and on my Amazon storefront at www.amazon.com/shop/historycalling
The country that has had possession of it for over 100 years.
It's bad luck.....send it back to India
@@mimsicle1 What about the people that owned it for 100s years before and was forced to “gift” as the British took custody a child heir to the throne…
Great Britain should keep it! It belongs to them! Merry Christmas 🎄🎁 ⛄️🎅🏻🧑🏻🎄
Merry Christmas History Calling! 🎄🎅
The supreme court of India a few years ago has ruled that the Diamond was not illegally taken, making it not a crime and not seen as illegitimately aquired.
I found out about this diamond when I worked in an Indian restaurant and they were telling me the story
so it shows you that the Indian people haven't forgot . 🇬🇧
A gift given under duress is not a gift. The diamond should be returned.
That's definitely a fair point.
But was it a gift or a ransom? And is a ransom considered a legitimate transfer of ownership? Coz if its not, then u have to go back further in the ownership chain. Im not saying, just keep the diamond and screw every1 else. But its a very complicated proposition to find who, if any, of the claimant would be the rightful owner. It would require probably years of historical research, and even if u were able to construct a complete ownership chain, u would then have to consider each transfer of ownership for legitimacy. And all of that should still start with actually having it analyzed to establish, where it was mined in the first place.
It would be a huge mistake to just say, that India says, its there, ok, give it back. Just consider, if the police has arrested a burglar and found some stolen jewelry. They then have to trace the rightful owner. 3 ppl all claim a certain necklace. Do u just give the necklace to the richest person? The 1 shouting the loudest? No, u have to figure out, who is the rightful owner. And thats very hard for a diamond, where u dont even know, where its originally from, and which has changed hands under murky circumstances more than once.
That doesnt mean, u shouldnt try. The police in my parable wouldnt just keep the necklace and give up finding the rightful owner. But it may be extremely difficult to trace the rightful owner of the diamond back through the centuries, and ultimately it may be the politically least damaging thing to keep it and display it, but not use it, as no matter who was given the diamond, the other claimants would be furious. Again, they should definitely try to establish, where is the diamonds origin, where was it mined, and established the chain of custody and each claim to ownership.
No 😂
Every transfer up to then seems to have been some kind of ransom or under duress. It was just a continuation of tradition it would seem.
Especially when the donor is a minor. Any contract with a minor is void ab initio
Ack, it is nothing but a rock. Never understood why everyone goes all gaga over diamonds and gold. Ridiculous that lives are lost over such.
I agree actually. They only have worth because we give it to them. They certainly aren't worth people's lives.
@@HistoryCalling For you people yes. its just a rock.
That DIamond wil always be a part of India/History. It should belong to them. For england its is a symbol of theft and Colonial History.
At least what England can do is return Diamond back to India to atone for what they did to India.
Don't forget the two court cases in India where the COURTS decided that the diamond legitimately belonged to the UK, allegedly it did't originally belong to the Maharajah either as they nicked it in the first place. There is a great video covering this stone.
Dont make me laugh !! England obtained this diamond illegally during colonial war thanks to odious blackmail due to its rapacity and keeping it is as dishonest as if Germany had kept the works of art stolen during the last war and if the diamond was stolen before that does not change the fact that the English have always plundered half of the planet and they themselves are the biggest thieves in the world and sad shopkeepers..The English bought back Louis'XIV ' Blue Diamond stolen and recut it to cover their tracks...It is now the Hope diamond.. End of story
I find the cut it had before Prince Albert had it recut very interesting. Even though it may not have maximized it's potential, I find that cut intriguing and beautiful in it's own right. And who doesn't love a good "cursed jewel" story?? I think it's hard to know at this point who should own the diamond. I think there are many things that should be returned to their country of origin (Nefertiti's bust is always the first that comes to mind), but I'm not sure this is necessarily one of them. Regardless of whether it should or should not possess it, I don't see the British Monarchy giving it up. Another great story!!
Yes, I'd love to be able to see the original as well. I'd also love to know what happened to the bits which were cut off.
Of course England need to return it to India (as well as everything else that was ‘gifted’ to them). And that they haven’t really shows how out of touch the British Royal Family is.
@@donna25871
Nothing should be "returned" unless EVERYONE returns EVERYTHING.
@@a.t.c.3862 exactly. Which is unrealistic
@@a.t.c.3862 I can't speak for the British, but I'm not parting with my relics
👏👏Love the mix of legend and letters, HC. Fascinating as always. I found it very interesting that some journalists questioned the legality of bringing the diamond to England even in the days when colonialism was prevalent and accepted by most. You're finishing up the year strong; can't wait for next week's offering. Be well, HC.
Thanks Stephen. Yes, it is interesting that there were eyebrows raised about the stone even in the 19th century. 🔹
Happy Holidays to everyone who enjoyed this richly entertaining post! We are currently under ice and snow, so what better way to pass the time than watching History Calling?
Thanks Ann. Stay safe and warm and happy holidays to you too.
Merry Christmas to you too Ann😘
I love your videos so much! I have long been a fan of history, in particular, English history (and I have NO IDEA why, but there it is). Regarding the jewel. It's a freaking rock. Why people fight over rocks, even pretty ones, I will never know. It's part of what is wrong with the human race in general, to fight over such stupid things, when there are much more important things to worry about. Still, I found this video intensely interesting, as I do all your videos, and I love your voice and accent. Thank you so much for these!
Exactly. Let the damn rock where it is and focus on the real problems of the people!
Thank you so much and yes, I agree, there are many much more important things in the world. Diamonds only have such a high value because we say they do (as opposed to things like water and food which have an intrinsic value in keeping us alive).
If someone takes your car, you will want it back even though it's only a bit of metal plus other. It serves you; the same with the diamond from India.
If the kohinoor is so unimportant why doesn't Britain return it to india.
Then give back the stone to India 🤷
If another country packed up and moved Stonehenge or [insert native to British Isles object here], I would be shocked if there wasn't agitation for its return. The Stone of Scone has only been returned to Scotland since 1996...
Excellent point. You're right. People would go crazy if Stonehenge or the like was taken.
But as I have commented in other threads, its different. There would be zero doubt as to the origins and rightful owners of Stonehenge, just like the "Elgin" Marbles and other such treasures, that were stolen from their known place of origin. Its much more complicated to establish rightful ownership to minor items, that have gone through multiple owners/"owners" through centuries, coz u both have to trace the chain of custody back to the origins of the item, and then u have to analyze each change of custody for whether or not it was a legitimate change of ownership. Many smaller items, especially jewels, ornaments, paintings and such have stolen more than once or used as ransom or bribery or such. So who along the chain were rightful owners, who were not? Thats very hard to establish. The origins of Stonehenge.... not so much.
Laura, all I can imagine is some guy just picking up the stones and running off with them 😂
I can imagine twenty indian guys carrying a stone pillar on their shoulders while running from bicycle police 😂
Good luck moving those Rocks!
Thank you very much HC for another great video. I wish you (the viewers too) a Happy Merry Christmas from Uruguay.
Thanks Patricia and Merry Christmas to you too 🎅
Hi HC, thanks for bringing us another interesting video.
I think that the diamond should have remained uncut and left in its natural beauty. Rather than have been cut into to meeting the latest fashion.
Also as to who should own it now, I wouldn’t want to open that Pandora’s box.
Have a Merry Christmas and I look forward to more learning in the new year.
Thanks James. Yes, I think the rebutting was a big mistake too.
That DIamond wil always be a part of India/History. It should belong to them. For england its is a symbol of theft and Colonial History.
At least what England can do is return Diamond back to India to atone for what they did to India for good karma.
Or they just can Ignore it. Bad karma. Indians wont forget.
Great stuff as always, but.... the jokes on you all. I bought this stone and a rare Rolex watch from a guy on the street in London some five years ago.😀 Got a great deal too!
😅
I love Fridays because it’s the magic combo: you post and History’s Forgotten People also does. Merry Christmas!!
Thanks AElfgifu (I can't get my phone to type the first two letters of your username correctly - sorry about that 😯).
@@HistoryCalling Haha no problem :) we blame the phones :-)
@@HistoryCalling My actual name is Amélia, by the way, Ig that’s more possible to type hehe
Have not various Indian factions fought one another for millennia, with the victors taking the spoils of war?
Merry Christmas, my dear Dr Ms History. I hope your Christmas is as amazing as you are. ❤️
How funny. Twice this week I’ve heard about this stone.
We were discussing it at work. I’m half Indian, so my work place were asking my opinion on it. I couldn’t answer then, and I don’t think I could now. It’s such a difficult line to tread. On one hand it’s a cultural icon, but on the other it’s absence has done nothing bad, in as far as that the country hasn’t sunk into the sea because the big shiny rock isn’t there.
The world is scattered with different countries items that are far from home. Should we return our cars, as the chips are from another land? Where is the line to be drawn?
Thanks Jay and Merry Christmas to you too. ⛇ 🎄 You also make some very interesting points about the stone. I'm not sure what the best answer is either.
I fear the stone question will never be answered. There are too many claimants. It’s the same as if the imperial heritage seal of china were to be found. Who gets it? China, or Taiwan?
I don't really know who should possess this diamond now. However, I think one of the very weakest arguments offered was David Cameron's. He was virtually admitting how many treasures in the British museum were either taken through the demonstration of superior power, or given or sold to a British entity by someone who had a dubious claim to them! [In 1979, I saw a sign next to the so-called Elgin Marbles arguing that they were being better taken care of in the British Museum than they would be in Athens, which was preposterous even then.] There are superb museums all over the world where tourists can go to see cultural treasures curated by experts, if they have the money to travel and like to see things with their own eyes. Moreover, given the high quality of today's visual media, millions of people can get an excellent view of the world's most fabulous treasures through public or private online resources, books or films, regardless of where they are housed. Of course, this particular gem is not only kept on display but used in British coronations, but that alone would not be a good argument for keeping it in the UK. What is needed is for all the countries involved to come to an agreement about the most appropriate and safe place for the diamond to be kept, and that doesn't appear likely to happen anytime soon.
Agreed! Antiquities belong in their place of origin.
Yes, I agree that would be preferable but like you I doubt any such agreement will ever be reached. You're correct too that a lot of the stuff in the British Museum (and other museums) shouldn't really be there. I wonder if there will be a grand reckoning about that some day...
Humans do not “own” any piece of earth nor what is extracted from it. We are but mere stewards ~ the line can die out, pestilences, wars, greed… Then, some time around three/score and ten, the human soul journeys on, leaving behind such “treasures” for the next generations to fret, fuss, fight and fry… On turns The Wheel…
It is sad the diamond was recut. And there is too much controversy over who is the rightful owner. If I understand it, there are no living heirs of the maharaja and it is unlikely the British will give it to the modern Indian state. You know what they say about possession being 9/10th of the law…Despite the controversy, it is likely Camilla will wear it. Thank you for another intriguing video!
Merry Christmas!
I never understood why the people of today complain about the theft taken place hundreds of years ago. Like my ancestors had tons of stuff stolen from them but I certainly don't think that the people NOW should be punished for it. Its a stone involved in many cultures, so does it really need to be owned by anyone?
Lots of countries lose things when treaties are signed. If they were all given back as if the treaty never existed, more of Europe would be speaking German, and more of Central Asia would be speaking Russian.
Yes, there is certainly an argument that this is just the way of the world and that everyone gets invaded at some point.
This sounds like the most colonizing conversation I’ve ever read. That’s crazy. England invaded India, had the nerve to call the resulting wars “unprovoked” and then took the diamond from an actual child! How is this messy or confusing? That’s illegal terrorism by today’s standards. It doesn’t belong to the UK. Someone somewhere in India should have it and India should decide that.
Merry Christmas. When my Yorkie dog saw the snow; He became worried about you. He thought something had happened to you. He was gonna to go and find you. Your his second favorite aunt.
Haha, thank you. No snow here in Northern Ireland fortunately. ❄
What an interesting piece of history! I unfortunately don’t see any way the stone can be returned to any one land or region without resulting in mayor conflicts and possibly wars being fought over it. I am conflicted when it comes to it being right for it to be kept by the UK, but I do deem it to at this point to be the best option.
As the previous owner was Duleep Singh surely his family/heirs have the strongest claim to it.
I don't think he has any living descendants, otherwise yes, I think they'd have a solid claim.
Since it has so much historic relevance, any private claim would be rebuffed by the government of origin.
I don't think any one country should own the Koh-i-noor. The diamond is the gifted property of and surrendered in treaty to the Crown. King Charles III is the head of the Commonwealth and heir to the Crown jewels. The diamond is a part of our collective Commonwealth history, not just England or the United Kingdom and certainly not just India, considering its relationship to Pakistan. I think it is unfortunate that the diamond was re-cut under the direction of Prince Albert. Maintaining its Indian style, regardless of its lack of luster would have at least shown greater reverence to the diamond's origin and India's place within the Commonwealth of Nations.
It was literally stolen from a 10 year old 😂😂
I hope you have a good Christmas and the New Year a continuing success for you. All of your videos are well thought out and interesting. As for the Diamond, I can’t see that it’s possession increased the “good” of anyone who owned it. It’s a rock, a pretty one, but a rock. 🎄🥰
Thanks Amy. I hope you have a great 2023 too.
I say give it back to the Indians. They're the ones who had it last - this isn't the best solution, but it is the most impartial. The English shouldn't keep it, as "finders keepers" has always seemed like a flimsy excuse for keeping other people's things
I wouldn't be surprised if that happens some day actually. We'll have to wait and see.
It DEFINITELY needs to go back to India, it's a shame the U.K has not given it back, it just shows that the U.K has not changed as much as they think they have. It's pretty SAD!!!
I am not really sure if the kohinoor should be returned to any of the 3 countries , considering there is not much care for historical artefacts or history for that matter ( until some war breaks in between or political unrest occurs ) , but displaying it as a possession of the country does leave a sour feeling ( especially since Dalhousie was involved ) . As for matching the English aesthetics, it does make sense that Prince Albert chose to do that since it all comes down to displaying it to a common man who would have not known what to appreciate in something that doesn't fit his definition of a diamond . Could've been handled with care though
Yes, someone else suggested displaying it in a museum rather than the crown jewels, which might be a better option.
@@HistoryCallingBut museums can’t be trusted to safeguard any of their items. It would be stolen for sure. Still, England shouldn’t ‘own’ it.
I don’t think Camilla will wear it, like her or not she’s aware of its troubled history.
I wasn’t aware that other countries were claiming it, my opinion is that it should go to India (if it ever is returned). That’s where it originated
I'll be very interested to see if she wears it too.
@@HistoryCalling If she wears it, I am sorry to say it will be 4ever cursed, it was previously desecrated when it was cut ...Let it then stay with them.
She is not worthy of it
Very exquisite video of a very exquisite piece of beauty. Well done HC. Have a Merry Christmas over there! :)
Thanks Sean. I ended up rather sick with a vomiting bug on Christmas night actually, but at least I had the whole day before that. Have a happy new year :-)
@@HistoryCalling My family gave me a bloody cold when I arrived home from visiting them, THEN my heater started to croak yesterday so it's 13 degrees (Celcius because I know we yanks only use the F word lol) in my house. lol
I wonder how many diamonds where cut from the cutting of the stone that no one knows about?
Same here. Even a fragment of the original Koh-i-noor could be worth a small fortune.
An intersting, insightful and well researched video with the perfect about of detail.
Do you think it could be possible that the quoted spectator from the Great Exhibition may have written this after the diamond was cut and has skewed a account because the account seems to describe the diamond before and after it was cut??
This colonial thing annoys me. England was not colonised by Germany,the Romans, the vikings, the French Normans because they wanted to plunder her tin….. no we were conquered and it has happened throughout history all over the world 😡 this is not at you by the way-good video 😊
@Lorraine Casey….as has every other country on this planet. The people that hold these countries today are the ones that won the last war and were strong enough to hold it from being taken again. There’s not a country or race of people that haven’t been captor and slave and then traded places. It’s been the way of the world for millennia.
Yes, it is very true that conquests have happened throughout history and might well continue to happen. There's the obvious attempt happening in Europe right now for instance.
Hi from new zealand 8),you have such a lovely voice to listen to and your pronunciation is superb,looking forward to more vlogs.
Thank you very much and greetings from Northern Ireland :-)
Apparently, on being asked the price of the Kohinoor, Maharaja Ranjit Singh had said. “paanch jooti”, which translates literally to “five slaps with a shoe” - a figure of speech common in India for “humiliating application of force”. His prediction was correct. Whether he continues to be correct in the future remains to seen.
I didn't come across that quote, but I wish I had now. It would have been great to include in the video.
Regarding the 19th century cut of the diamond, surely an oval cut or even a pear shape would have been possible without sacrificing such a high percentage of the stone. But maybe they weren't doing those shapes yet. Also given the confused history of possession of the stone, and we don't actually know where it was mined, I think it should stay in the UK, but Camilla definitely shouldn't wear it. Given her _penchant_ for the seemingly largest tiaras available, she probably will. We're finally above zero Fahrenheit (-18 C) here after recording the lowest temp (-24F) in Denver in over 30 years overnight Wed. into Thurs.Happy Holidays to all!
It'll certainly be interesting to see if she wears it. Stay safe and warm over there ⛇
@@HistoryCalling Luckily a warming trend starts tomorrow with temps on Christmas up to a balmy 10 c
A Queen should wear a glue and glitter headband?
I see a History Calling upload I CLICK!
Thanks Michael 😁
You have a beautiful voice and do a great job. Thank you
"We can't give back this thing that we stole, because then we'd have to give back a bunch of other stolen things." Solid reasoning.
Yes, I admit it isn't the strongest logic you'll ever come across
Merry Christmas, HC!!! Hope there's something good waiting for you under the tree!
THANKS STEPHEN. My main gift was actually a bookcase, so it won't fit under the tree, though it is made from one if that counts 😀 Have a wonderful Christmas too 🎅 🎄
Before the Brits were in India and during the beginning women who had lost their husbands would be sacrificed on a fire by moguls & holy men . So the Empire was not all bad and the Spanish and Dutch traded in more slaves as did Arab states .
Based on the reasoning for taking the diamond in the first place it looks like it should have been returned when England left India in 1947. The fact that it wasn't can be seen as hypocritical and indicates a completely different reason it was taken in the first place. It would have been a really symbolic gesture to return it at that time, however during that turbulent time where a new government was being established, a process that ultimately split India into three separate nations (India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh), I'm sure the diamond would have caused quite a bit of conflict. In the end the diamond should be returned to India. Pakistan doesn't really have a claim to it due to the fact it was at the insistence of the now Pakistanis to split away from India citing fears of persecution by the Hindi majority. The diamond was Indian. Pakistan left India, not the other way around. They shouldn't get to take the "family heirlooms" with them. It would be nice if people just saw it as heritage instead of a fortune. Then maybe there wouldn't be all this fighting over it.
I just LOVE, LOVE your work, thank you for helping me continue to learn. Blessings and Merry Christmas.
Thank you and you're very welcome. I hope you had a lovely Christmas and have a wonderful 2023.
Love this kind of story great job. I think India should get the diamond back
Thanks Vernon. Yes they do have a strong case for it
The history is so long and complicated that who knows who it "belongs" to. It should stay in Britain, it's most recent owner. I think it should be removed from the crown jewels and displayed in a museum, along with an extensive discussion of it's history...including the colonial aspects
Yes, that might be a good compromise solution. I don't think it's going to go down well if Camilla wears it.
I am sorry and I am not trying to patronise, but I do believe that this diamond is part of other people heritage, and these people are not the British. I understand that there is controversy about which country it should be repatriated to, as the modern political boundaries do not reflect the past ones and there are different places where this jewel was kept for long periods of time.
Having said that, it came to the British as a symbol of colonial conquest. Time, political context (and hopefully mentality) have changed.
Any feeling of entitlement to keep it on the British crown is quite surprising, if not worrying, and should be, in my opinion, reassessed.
@@mariangelalanza4930 whoever it could be given to, it would just cause more conflict with a bunch of other places claiming ownership. It would solve nothing.
@@cassieoz1702 I absolutely agree! Diplomatic relations are quite complex, and given the circuitous history of this gem, any effort to return it would be untenable - even in an attempt at goodwill - as it would only be interpreted as a showing of favoritism towards the recipient nation over other claimants. It would also be highly irresponsible on the part of the U.K. and affect their standing within the community of nations, as it would increase tensions and resentment in a region already rife with it.
People lacking a full understanding of political circumstances fail to appreciate the delicate balance - on many fronts - entailed where foreign relations are concerned - and especially regarding those possessing of nuclear capabilities. We are speaking of countries marked by political instabilities, assassinations and attempts thereof, risks of coups, worries of the flow of weapons... I could go on. It is laughably naive to think that a 💎the worth of this one - and what that might buy - and what groups that could incentivize - isn’t a factor in these concerns.
Akin to slavery in the U.S., Britain’s prior colonial rule is a fact that cannot be rectified by the conciliatory actions of the present. I firmly believe that efforts to return the gem would be construed on the world stage as Britain engaging in ineffectual image-polishing - and at the expense of their allies who go to great expense and at great pains to maintain equilibrium in South Asia.
Not to be patronizing or anything (snort) but it’s a non-starter.
Brava, Kazoo Libra, for your superlative insight that the greatest positive value of this gem lies with its potential to educate others as to the misdeeds of the past. Your proposed solution is brilliant. 👏🏻
Of the three claimants, India has the best chance of keeping it safe. When the joyous day comes that there is peace in Afghanistan and Pakistan both should share with India the display of the diamond. A museum full of stolen treasures is nothing to be proud of!
Yes, it would indeed be lovely if those two countries had peace (in fact world peace amongst humans would be great, but one step at a time!)
India has the best chance of keeping it safe? Erm, no way it would be stolen in no time I’m sorry to say. The safest place it’s ever been in it’s history is in England where it currently is.
I think it should be returned to India. You have to think of India as it was at the time. Pakistan did not exist until 1947. So technically, most of the stone's existence was in the historical India. But then, I also think that the Elgin Marbles, more properly the Parthenon Sculptures, should be returned to Greece.
A happy Yule to all!
Yes, I think India's claim is stronger than Pakistan's in this instance. I think the Parthenon Sculptures should go back too, but we'll have to wait and see what happens I guess.
The diamond seems to have moved around a lot - on a pendant, then on a bracelet, then in a crown. Could Camilla have it removed from the Queen Consort crown and replaced by a stone (not even necessarily a diamond - a ruby would be awesome) of her choice? Oh, and I think it belongs in England.
Definitely and I wouldn't be surprised if she does have it swapped out. It hasn't even been a part of the Crown Jewels for all that long in the grand scheme of things.
The Diamond is part of the Crown Jewels and I would think not subject to the whims of an individual, temporal, monarch…
The East India Company threatened the 10 year old Maharaja with the death of his mother in exchange for the diamond?
It was obtained by crime.
It does not belong to England
@@cindiloowhoo1166
"I would think not subject to the whims of an individual, temporal, monarch…" You mean you think the Monarch can't even have it removed from the Queen Consort Crown? What about the fact that it has moved around before as said above? It was on pendant, a bracelet, then a crown. In any case, it was removed from the Queen Consort' Crown. Camilla did not wear the diamond.
Such interesting research and storytelling. As for the 19th century recutting of the Koh-I-Noor, I would chalk this up to British arrogance and racism.
Yeah, it was incredibly stupid to recut it and I'd like to know what happened to the bits removed.
I can’t believe they cut it almost in half! It should go back to India.
I know. The recutting was pretty shocking.
Love watching your stories… totally intriguing and interesting ❤ thank you
Thanks Michelle. I aim to please 😀
Merry Christmas HC, you and your Diamonds haha, the diamond should not have been cut it has lost its natural beauty, as for ownership several countries have a claim on it, so it has to stay where it is until a solution is found but that won't be anytime soon. Thank you as always for our journey through the mists of time with you. 🎅🎄😊
Thanks Simon and Merry Christmas to you also. Yes, I think the recut was a big mistake too.
@@HistoryCalling Thanks HC, have a great time. 🎄🎅😊
There’s almost something sinister about the level of arrogance and entitlement it would take to think you had leave to alter a pilfered stone with such a rich history.
Thank you for such an informative video, as this has been discussed in the news lately, l am glad to know it's history. 💎
You're welcome. Yes, the news story was one of the reasons I did the video at this time (though it was already on my to-do list).
merry christmas HC! a year of amazing content down 🙌🏻 since it is -3 degrees F here, i’ll be spending my evening watching this and trying not to freeze 🤣 you know i love a jewel video!!
Thank you. Stay safe and warm. I'm literally just watching a news report about all the extreme weather in North America at the moment.
@@HistoryCalling it’s hitting us really hard here in ohio!! i hope it lets up soon 😭
Basically, this beautiful stone has passed through to various owners, via either inheritance, spoils of war or through extortion. If you reject spoils of war for Britain, then you must also reject it for other countries too. Britain's claim is the latest claim of spoils of war. Britain went through 2 wars in India and many lives were lost on both sides. The diamond was also given, begrudgingly, as a gift directly to Queen Victoria. It makes no difference whether Duleep Singh wanted it back or not. The Indian Government has never owned the diamond, so their claim is spurious anyway. The only other potential owner would be the direct descendants of Duleep Singh, of which there are none. The last descendant died in 1959. As far as I can see, Britain's claim and ownership of the diamond, is pretty rock solid (sorry for the pun). The diamond is a working part of the Crown Jewels of the UK. It is honoured, protected, valued and is a symbol of our links to the subcontinent. It was given. You don't ask for gifts back, certainly not over 100 years since it was given.
I seriously doubt it's going back to India as well to be honest.
seems like everyone who saw it before and after the cut was dissapointed- I wonder what it looked like and also, very suspicious that the offcuts dissapeared 😂 it's bakers priveledge to eat the offcuts of a cake, but I don't think jewellers privilege is 40% of the biggest diamond in the world to take home
also, who knoews should have it now- the history was messy enouogh that no one's really got a clear claim but doesn't really feel like it belongs to the british monarchy (I say this as a brit), also, as much as it might be wildly expensive- it's also kinda pointless, like it jsut looks pretty, yes it's big but it's not really doing anything
Yes, I would really like to know what happened to the offcuts too. They'd be worth a pretty penny as well.
I would have left it alone. The historic cut would have been wonderful to see.
I know. I'd love to see it as well.
Make you wonder what happened to the rest? Did they use the rest after it was cut on the crown or did they put in a bunch of brooches.
I think we have to remember that this is just a carbon rock and belongs to the Earth. I think most of the people fighting over it would be pacified if the British Royals just acknowledged their mistakes in colonising other countries and taking their possessions and put the dimond in a museum.
Yes, I agree that it is just a rock. There are much more important things in the world.
Couldn't agree more
@@HistoryCalling yeah absolutely right there's much more important thing than kohinoor so why britishers are not give it back? They will say that current generation are not responsible for that dark past on the other hand they will glorify and celebrates there past by holding that stolen things. Get a life brits apart from being hypocrates .
Even if it’s modern day “proper place” in India is in dispute, the following 3 simple truths are not in dispute:
1. It doesn’t belong in the UK
2. Even if we don’t where in India it belongs, we know that it belongs in India
3. It should be India’s business to decide where in India it belongs
I have three questions.
1. Do you think Henry 6th would have been more successful as A constitutional monarch ?
2. How was the relationship between queen Elizabeth I 's England and Japan ?
3. Do you think if Henry V had lived longer; would England have kept hold of France ?
I'm typing on my phone so I hope you don't mind me keeping this very brief: 1) Yes, if he'd lived 400 years later. 2) Don't know I'm afraid. 3) Yes, probably.
@@HistoryCalling As long you answered my questions- I'm satisfied.
Hi, Awesome live video I enjoyed it can't wait to see more soon. Can you do a video about Michel de Nostradamus he was a historical person in the 16th century. Have a great day greetings from Canada 😀
Very informative history of the Kohinoor diamond. It was last owned by the young Sikh King of Panjab, Maharaja Dalip Singh. The British successfully dismentled the Sikh Monarchy.
King Philip lost the crown
@ulyssesbinoya1134 Well King Charles got the Crown 👑
If we should give back all items which were ever taken (by force or bought) it's ridiculous..where to begin, where to end?...and to whom because most of them changed owners several times in the history...🤔
This only applies to England apparently
What an informative video! As an aside, in hearing the commentary from a Victorian observer about how the gem shouldn't have been cut and judgements about the display really prove that even back then some randos gonna tell the world they know better.
It was given to the royal family by the sultan . Too bad india your own supreme court ruled in favor that it rightfully belongs to the royal family !
I'm fascinated by the possibility that it could have originally been the Shamantaka jewel that Jambuvan and Krsna had a great battle over. I have known about this story for decades because I follow all the past times of Krsna. I have really enjoyed this video of the jewels history.
The diamond belongs to Goddess Bhadrakali. Wherever the diamond will be that Kingdom that Kingdom will be destroyed within decades. So better return it to Bhadrakali temple in Telangana, India.
No I think the curse has been neutralized by being in Europe, I think it should stay there.
The Diamond has No Owner it belongs to the Earth & She Gaia wants it to go to All the people of the World - for the Good of All that is - and so it is - Blessings.
Did Cameron inadvertently admit that the great part of the contents of the British Museum were obtained under fishy circumstances?
Interesting
Thank you 😀
Have a wonderful very Merry Christmas 🎅 🎄 weekend! Wonderful episode 👏 ❤️ Thank you.
Thanks Holly. I've had over a week off work and am just getting back to it now. :-)
It makes no sense that the this diamond is not worn yet its 2 accenting diamonds (now earings) were continued to be worn for decades and also the lahore pendant? Its very picky choosy
Thank you for another interesting historical gem-stone video!
I'm just disappointed that you completely glossed over the fact that the British East India Company was key in expanding and spreading the opium trade. It's wealth came in large part through pushing opium on new populations, e.g. China.
You're welcome. It's not that I was trying to gloss over anything, it's just that this is already (by my standards) a very long video and it was about the diamond, rather than the history of the East India Company. That would be a completely different video and require lots of extra research using different sources. Perhaps I'll look at it in the future though.
@@HistoryCalling Thanks for your prompt reply. I appreciate it! I must admit to being personally invested in the topic. I’m ethnically Chinese and it really upsets me that most British people (including educated ones) believe that the “evil Chinese” pushed opium onto the rest of the world when, in fact, Britain used its military to force Chinese authorities to permit opium to be sold in China. I recognise that a video about the K-i-N diamond is not the place to go into the subject. But since you brought up the British East India Company and also (which I do appreciate!) tangentially the topic of colonialism, it would have been great to see some slight recognition of the fact that British wealth was also built on pushing opium.
Great video on a touchy subject. I really do appreciate that you did mention a couple of the controversial topics 💖
Yes. The East India Company started the Opium Wars to destabilize Old Imperial China because the Chinese Emperor would not be coaxed or cajoled to have commerce with England where England had the affontery to pretty much demand that China take the short end of any deal in trade. Chinese Emperor declined and had them shown out for their rude hubris superiority on his turf.
Given the past of this diamond in how it has moved from one dynasty to other, and if the legends about the diamond hild any weight, it could be taken away from England.
The modern day force would not be colonial or military, but geopolitical and strategic duress.
Thanks, very good! So much history
Thank you too! 😁
I wish they hadn't cut it and not only that, but it shouldn't have been taken from india in the first place
9:43 its not fair to say the guy was paranoid and then say he was assassinated...
Haha, yes ok, I take your point there (though he'd been paranoid for a long time before that).
Well done HC. This bit of history held my interest for the full 30 minutes.
England should hold it dear and it should be used in corinations.
Merry Christmas!
Thanks John and Merry Christmas to you too 🎅
It's 4 degrees Fahrenheit, or about 15 degrees Celsius in my home city. A very cold day. Hopefully it's much nicer and WARMER elsewhere. Another great video!!!
It's summer here. Nice weather in Uruguay, South America.
15 degrees would be very mild here in Northern Ireland for this time of year 🙂 We'll not expect balmy temperatures like that until April at least 😅
@@HistoryCalling wow, this is totally foreign to me, even though I've lived in Missouri now for almost two years. I guess I'm too used to California Weather.
Lol 4 degrees Fahrenheit is not 15 degrees celsius. You mean -15. And that’s not as bad but I am a Montanan😂
@@di3486
Oops, well, I'm an American and I'm not familiar with Celsius....
If the British government give all the artefacts back to the countries of the original origin which are displayed in the museum they would only be stuffed foxes and hedgehogs left .
Good evening to history calling
Hi Bea. Happy holidays 🙂
The Sheer downright arrogance of the British Empire . Return to whence it comes from xxx
No. It was taken by conquest. According to the rules of war it belongs to the conqueror. Read Caesar's commentaries
Merry Christmas and thanks for great stories. Did I mention that great accent. Luv from Baltimore Maryland
Thank you so much. Merry Christmas to you too. 🎄
How many homes in the poorest parts of India could this diamond generate if sold? They need to give this diamond back to India.
The poorest people in that country deserve it. They deserve to have homes built with the finances brought from the sale of this diamond.
British can give the monetary worth back to India and keep the diamond
@@anishaganguly1440 we kind of already have with the trillions in aid we’ve sent over the years.
The Blue Diamonds ,Tavernier and really any large Diamond are submerged in history, myth, intrigue ,betrayal ,destruction and controversy that I find fascinating . . they are pretty .. But When I reflect on all of it , .... it's a lot of bother for a Rock .
I am all for returning stolen objects to their original owners . But I worry that some of these pieces of history and art will disappear .... especially if all our eggs are in one basket.
Thanks for another trip through history.
Yes, these things so seem to attract trouble and wacky stories don't they? I agree actually that they are at the end of the day, just pretty carbon. There are many much more important things in the world.
By the time the whole world is done with the “royals”, taking back all their stolen diamonds & artefacts; they’ll be left penniless!!!😂😂😂😂
India has no clear claim to the diamond, it passed through many hands. To the Victor go the spoils. It remains where it is.
Just like every other stolen goods from various colonized nations, isn't it?
Why does it seem the most important and coolest items always wind up in the hands of British and English kings and queens? It seems most are Ill gotten or mysteriously wind up in their hands. Strange.
I think it helps that they've outlasted so many other monarchies and been able to purchase some of their items. Some good things are elsewhere though, like the Hope Diamond in the Met.
@@HistoryCalling I’ll agree that’s very true. Thank you for your response.
@@HistoryCalling -- With all due respect, the Hope Diamond was gifted to and is on display at the Smithsonian Institute's Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C., not the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City.
It would be in better taste if Camilla did not have the Koh-I-Nor in the Queen Consort's crown. She likes blue. Maybe switch it out for a sapphire or aquamarine. Even a grown man made one with better atomic structure quality for flawlessness/brilliance.
It would appear to me that the object of the East India Company and the empire was to divest the world of its wealth.
Have you even seen it in person? I have not. If you can could you please take some photos of it thank you
Merry Christmas and a lovely new year and many new videos xx
Thanks Wendy. I hope you have a great 2023 too. :-)
I am undecided about who should have possession of the Koh-I-Noor diamond, though I do believe it should be someone other than the British royal family. Thank you for a most welcome Christmas present; this episode is a great gift. Best wishes to you and yours for the holidays and the coming new year!
Why, specifically, not the British royal family? I mean it was giving to Britain for helping the maharaja fight the 'sikh wars'.
Can’t be safer than with the English
Thanks Sarah. I hope you had a good Christmas too.
As we now know, Queen Camilla did NOT use the Koh-i-noor in her crown at the coronation. Rather, she use the Cullinans 3 and 4. My question is...Given the 3 and 4 have always been the _personal_ property of the Queen and bequeathed to her by Queen Mary, does the use in the crown somehow make it "Crown" property? Has King Charles given it to the Crown? Where are the 3 and 4 now? In the Jewel house? I am very, very interested in learning the exact whereabouts of the 3 and 4 and what the future is for them!
The Royal Collection Trust currently says no more at its site than the jewels were inherited by Queen Elizabeth II. According to some articles the two Cullinan stones were "borrowed" for the occasion, which, I assume that they are still personal property.
Cutting off over 40% of the stone was definitely not worth it. It went from a unique shape to 'eh' and lost a lot of what made it so amazing. I think it's a fantastic example of European ideals being held up as "the right way" to do things with no regard for different values and preferences, when the original cut of the diamond made perfect sense to the prior owners and what they valued in the stone. (And frankly to me too: diamonds that size are RARE; why cut a bunch off just so it sparkles a bit more??)
Many museums would be empty not just the British museum.
Very true.
It was a gift